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
>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.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk