From: Sibylle Schupp (schupp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-09-19 09:22:02
> However the allocator parameter here just kind of gets in the way. I put
> it in place because the class does allocate memory, however in the long
> I feel that this would be better managed by its own internal memory
1. Even if the memory manager is tailored for this particular class I would
it in a separate component that is orthogonal to the rest of the class
I would then need an allocation parameter to bind this component.
2. Without allocation parameter there is no way to override an internal
design decision. What if the internal memory handler optimizes for speed
while a user is
more interested in space efficiency?
3. We are developing a garbage collector for class templates and in fact
on using regex as (another) example to study when garbage collection
improves computation times. Although we haven't really worked with regex
yet, I expect there
will be problems if we bind the allocator at the user's level (in
instances of list or string classes
in the main program) to the garbage collector, but cannot propagate this
binding "all the way down."
For example references from one heap to the other---the garbage-collected
one and the
one of the internal manager---will be difficult to handle. I would also
expect that the total
memory overhead increases the more allocators are involved.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk