From: Mike Nordell (tamlin_at_algonet.se)
Date: Thu Mar 11 2004 - 13:57:45 EST
> Can an MSVC developer test a fraction of what you attempt first?
VC6 handles templates reasonably well, so long as one stays out of some more
esoteritc aspects of it.
What worries me a bit is that I just now (only a few minutes ago) checked
what kind of code GCC generates for template functions, and I must say what
I found will probably haunt me in my dreams tonight. No matter what
combination of flags I gave the compiler could it seemingly produce anything
that even reminded of sensible, inlined code. More on this below.
> There is folklore that says MSVC doesn't do templates. I just want to be
> sure before you launch into this.
IIRC VC5 had some serious problems. I've been using templates in VC6 for
over half a decade now.
> But as a general point I really like the idea. C++ is a type-safe
> language. It sucks that we spend so much effort deliberately not using
> this feature because we cast to void * for vectors.
Then I must ask - why reinvent the wheel over and over again, and not just
start using e.g. std::vector? If that's not suitable, at least give the
current vector class a standard C++ container interface? Need a stack?
std::stack. Just an idea.
Hub, before embarking on this journey, would you mind making a small test.
I've already thrown away the test code, but it went something like:
extern const int* src1;
extern const int* src2;
extern int* dest;
extern size_t count;
std::transform(src1, src1+count, src2, dest, std::plus<int>());
It theoretically could have been me not throwing enough flags at GCC (but
at -O3 I don't think I should have to), but the code generated was ... If I
try to be polite I could define it as "suboptimal".
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 13:58:08 EST