Re: [boost] Why no pool allocator for shared_ptrs?

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-03 17:53:14

At 06:05 PM 6/3/2001, AlisdairM wrote:

 >I firmly believe "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" and repeated use of
 >shared_ptr has proven it stable for our needs.
 >
 >Yet every time I read about pool/small object allocators, the reference
 >count of the shared_ptr libraries screams out as a classic example, if an
 >int is not a small object, what is?!
 >
 >Is there any reason not to investigate this for boost?  Or has this 
already
 >been evaluated and rejected?

Just inertia AFAIK.  I think someone (Dave?) did this for some timings 
quite a while ago, but before Boost.Pool was accepted.

If someone would like to pull together such a version, I'm sure Greg and I 
would appreciate it.

--Beman