I'm trying to determine how widely used named slot groups are in the Signals library. I would appreciate it if I could get some feedback on if they're used, how they're used, etc. In particular: (1) Do you use named slot groups? (2) Did the FIFO ordering guarantees in 1.32.0 and the ability to add to the front or back of the slot list alleviate the need for named slot groups? (3) If performance of connection/disconnection of named slot groups were to get worse (e.g., linear in the number of slots), would it seriously impact the performance of your application? Responses should probably come to me, personally, unless they would be of interest to the group. Background: Signals performance is sub-par, and much of the problem can be traced back to support for named slot groups. I'm trying to determine the best way to proceed. Thanks, Doug
Douglas Gregor wrote:
Background: Signals performance is sub-par, and much of the problem can be traced back to support for named slot groups. I'm trying to determine the best way to proceed.
I would be surprised if the poor memory performance is caused by the named slot groups (from what tiny bit I know about it). Of course the speed performance is just as important. FWIW our company makes no use of the named slot groups. I'm very much looking forward to your changes (I'm currently using a sigc that's been hacked to have (mostly) the same interface as boost)! Thanks, Neal
participants (2)
-
Douglas Gregor
-
Neal Coombes