Re: [lmi] upgrade to xmlwrapp-0.6.0

[Greg Chicares]

On 2009-04-23 18:51Z, Vaclav Slavik wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 20:47 +0000, Greg Chicares wrote:
> 
>> [...] couldn't measure any improvement with
>>   CPPFLAGS='-DHAVE_BOOST_POOL_SINGLETON_POOL_HPP'
>> in the 'input_test' unit test's timings. Otherwise, I would have
>> added it. But that would still take extra work.
> 
> That's strange, I measure ~40% improvement (I don't remember if it was
> in input_test or only iterators-manipulating subset of it, though) with
> MinGW's gcc-3.4. Did you use 3.4 or 4.3 in your tests? The improvement
> in performance with gcc-4.x is so small it's only observable under
> valgrind, but I did see real difference with 3.4 back when I was working
> on this...

I'm definitely using three point four point X, from 2005 or so.
I'll rebuild here and test again.

>> However, what do you think of this idea:
>>   
>> http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_38_0/libs/test/doc/html/utf/compilation/direct-include.html
> 
> Why not, it looks easier to maintain
> 
>> Or such a file could be provided as part of the library, whose
>> configure script and makefile could handle all those issues. Then
>> again, you might not want that in the library.
> 
> Indeed, I'd rather not include that in xmlwrapp itself, unless there are
> more uses for it than building LMI.

Okay. I'll make that change--I kind of wanted to anyway. I don't
mind maintaining it. If you ever want it in xmlwrapp, it'll be
available.