[Xorp-hackers] More ideas for xorp code size improvements.
bms at incunabulum.net
Thu Apr 15 09:10:03 PDT 2010
On 04/15/10 07:48, Ben Greear wrote:
> I'm not too sure. It might be that horribly complex template
> thing that builds callbacks methods. If I were to tackle it, I'd
> probably change some callback signatures to pass in const string&
> and then see what broke and try to work backwards from there...
Futzing with 'string' might be a noop, because many STL implementations
ref-count the internal string representation (GNU libstdc++ does, for
More information about the Xorp-hackers