Re: [boost] Re: SmartPtr - Exception safety reprise

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-01 17:08:01

"David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Well, I want to at least give the VC++ guys a few days to see if
> they say anything.  I posted a question on a M$ newsgroup.  I
> think I did the first time around, too, and they didn't.  It would be
> really cool if, say, Jason Shirk offered some insight, or at least
> knocked some skulls so we got *some* kind of answer, even if
> it's "there's no way in heck we will give out that kind of
> information".  

What question are you asking?  I think all NDAs on the vc7.1 betas are
expired, so I can just run a test...

However, you obviously missed my point: there _is_ no way in heck
they're going to change the object layout, thus making vc7.1 object
code incompatible with vc7 object code.  Objects with multiple empty
bases have to have the same size in both versions and their members
have to live at the same offsets.

BTW, VC++ is not the only kid on the block, and the same argument
applies to all the other players.

> At least then I could give up hope, and we could fully enter the
> tedious debate over alternatives.  But there must be *someone* on
> the VC++ compiler team that wrote the EBO code, and if it were me,
> I'd have enough pride to at least say when I know that it *does*
> work (and it does work for some MI...optimally_inherit was doing its
> job until the latest round of changes).  

What is optimally_inherit?  Latest round of changes in what?

-- 
                       David Abrahams
   dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution