Re: [boost] ASIO into the standard (was: Re: C++ committee meeting report)

Subject: Re: [boost] ASIO into the standard (was: Re: C++ committee meeting report)
From: Neil Groves (neilgroves_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-07-04 06:46:45

On 4 Jul 2014, at 10:47, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 1 July 2014 22:45, Felipe Magno de Almeida wrote:
>> 
>> I would hope Allocators would be added to ASIO in the standard. It
>> is difficult to limit memory usage without Allocators in embedded
>> systems.
> 
> I hate this recurring theme of "let's take something that works well
> today and then fsck it up by insisting it has allocator support”
> 

Since I am far less familiar with these issues than you are the solution to avoiding detriment to designs by having allocator support is not obvious to me. What should we do instead of adding allocator support? Should we be improving the standard allocator like the implementations in Boost.Container, or are you suggesting that any standardisation of the allocator Concept would lead to a deterioration of the design? My own view is that the standard allocator is clearly suboptimal even for standard containers. This is evident from the performance improvements obtained in Boost.Container. I have noticed though that the improved allocators do not provide superior performance on Linux systems over the standard implementations. I’m very interested in your proposed solutions as I suspect there is much to learn from your experience working on the standard library implementations.

Regards,
Neil Groves

> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost