Re: [lmi] PATCH: Upgrade xmlwrapp to 0.9.0

[Vadim Zeitlin]

On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 18:11:11 +0000 Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:

GC> On 2018-04-11 17:08, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
[...]
GC> >  First of all, right now xmlwrapp can be built without these
GC> >  packages, i.e.
GC> 
GC> [...filing the specifics away for future reference...]
GC> 
GC> > % CPPFLAGS=-I/opt/lmi/third_party/include [...]
GC> > 
GC> > - CPPFLAGS is needed to find the Boost headers.
GC> 
GC> I was really looking forward to removing all boost dependencies.
GC> IIRC, xmlwrapp uses only boost's "singleton pool", and only if
GC> it's available. IOW, it's an optional optimization, so this
GC> doesn't stand in the way of eliminating boost--true?

 Yes, use of Boost.Pool is optional. I don't know how important of an
optimization it is, considering the number of small allocations in the code
(e.g. each node needs one), I think it might well be however. Would it be
useful to (a) write a benchmark testing how much memory/time is used when
loading a biggish XML document and run it with and without the pool and (b)
replace Boost.Pool with a manual allocator if the results differ
significantly? Please let me know if you'd like me to do this.

 BTW, it does bother me that the tests need to be disabled due to lack of
Boost.Iostream, but replacing this one isn't trivial as it's used for its
gzip support and, having recently added xz support to wx streams, I know
that doing the same thing using zlib is definitely possible, but not
especially appealing...

 Regards,
VZ