[boost] Re: Boost Integer Library

From: Valentin Bonnard (Bonnard.V_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-08-18 09:47:44

Reid Sweatman wrote:
> 
> > Yes, and that is a very conscious design decision.  These classes are
> > very low-level.  So like built-in types, they don't default
> > initialize the value.  Same rationale as for the built-in types.
> > Efficiency does count here. These things often appear in structs of
> > which huge buffer arrays for I/O are constructed, and we don't want
> > those initialized.
> >
> > Remember that bin/ubin are used almost exclusively for trafficking
> > with the outside world via some I/O mechanism.
> >
> > Now if lots of people complain, the initialization polity could
> > change.  So people who think these classes should default initialize
> > should speak up!  Otherwise they will stay the way they are.
> >
> > Thanks for bring this up; it is the kind of design decision that
> > needs to be widely exposed to the light of day.  In general it is
> > certainly better to default initialize.
> 
> How about including an initializer parameter that defaults to false, in the
> same manner as allocators in container constructors?

What do you mean exactly ?

The following ?

class foo
{public:
   foo (bool initialise) { if (initialise) value = 0; }
};

?

-- 
Valentin Bonnard