Date: 2000-12-04 11:51:47
> new will guarantee alignment for C++ types; unfortunately, SIMD types do
> not map to C++ and the default new is not guaranteed to work for them.
I thought SIMD was just special (parallel) operations on arrays of doubles
(or long doubles?)...
> > Pool itself passes off the alignment issues to operator new. Thus, it
> > should be possible to tackle alignment issues by overloading operator
> > if you know your compiler doesn't provide proper alignment.
> Yes, this is an option; but wouldn't it be better to allow user-supplied
> allocation/deallocation functions?
Maybe. I have to question how often it would be used without overriding
global new/delete anyway. In other words: is it really worth the
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk