Re: [boost] Proposal: class nonallocatable

From: Dave Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-04-29 20:37:02

on 4/29/00 6:55 PM, Jeffrey D. Paquette at paquette_at_[hidden] wrote:

> While it is possible to write code that
> allocates a deferred_value, it does not seem very useful. (Wrapping it in an
> auto_ptr just adds a level of indirection - it preserves the semantics of
> the class at the cost of overhead).

Well, you can use an auto_ptr to pass ownership across scopes, changing the
effective behavior of the object being managed. So the question is, does the
a class such as nonallocatable prevent abuse, or will it merely be an
inconvenience for those who want to do valid things unanticipated by the
original designer? I guess it depends on your target audience?

no-opinions-here-just-askin-ly y'rs,
Dave