Re: [fusion] Proposal for deprecating fusion.tuple.
chris beck <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.parsers.spirit.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAF6+5c+0ufVwCrq2JSCJTGWbq3esjc11KiyM4abX-XLP85TPgA@mail.gmail.com> |
> I propose deprecating fusion.tuple, it makes fusion.vector > implementation complex. If fusion::tuple is deprecated in favor of std::tuple, would this also mean that boost::fusion would require C++11-conforming standard library to compile? Right now, unless I'm mistaken, fusion works fine even on e.g. gcc 4.5, and there are many C++03 etc. projects that depend on it. What is the gain that you hope to achieve here, improved compilation times? How can moving to std::tuple accomplish that, since presumably the implementation quality of std::tuple will vary greatly from compiler to compiler? Wouldn't it be simpler to just try to make fusion::tuple faster in the perceived problematic cases? > Hence, why not replace fusion::tuple with hana tuple? And hana is also far more demanding than fusion in terms of compiler support. For instance it doesn't work at all on MSVC yet, and so is totally inappropriate for some cross-platform projects. Chris On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Larry Evans <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09/29/2017 09:17 AM, Lee Clagett wrote: > [snip] > >> >> For C++11 `fusion::tuple` I noticed that if the assignment from fusion >> sequences was removed (its constructor currently does not allow >> conversion from sequences and `std::tuple` has no such requirement), >> then the headers automatically included could be reduced. So >> `fusion::tuple` _could_ be a faster compiling sequence for when the >> conversion properties of `fusion::vector` was not needed. Of course, >> since most have a good implementation of `std::tuple` perhaps this >> unnecessary? I would like to point out that recent tweaks to >> `fusion::vector` have [improved performance over libstdc++ `std::tuple` >> in construction][0][1]. >> >> [snip] > >> [0] http://metaben.ch/hetero/clang++-4.0/make/index.html >> [1] http://metaben.ch/hetero/g++-7/make/index.html >> >> [0] shows hana tuple significantly better than the c++ `fusion::tuple`. > Hence, why not replace fusion::tuple with hana tuple? > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------ > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > _______________________________________________ > Spirit-general mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spirit-general > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Spirit-general mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spirit-general