RE: [boost] BCB5, the pimpl idiom bug and the new Unit Test Framework

From: Fernando Cacciola (fcacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-12-21 09:49:04

----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Dimov <pdimov_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [boost] BCB5, the pimpl idiom bug and the new Unit Test
Framework

> From: "Fernando Cacciola" <fcacciola_at_[hidden]>
> > From: Peter Dimov <pdimov_at_[hidden]>
>
> [impl_ptr]
>
> > > No, it's not part of Boost since I haven't requested a review yet. ;-)
> > >
> > Would you request it now?
>
> I want to polish it a bit first. So much interesting work, so little time.
>
> > I would like to see the new Test Library using impl_ptr<> so it can be
> used
> > with Borland C++ out of the box.
>
> The right thing IMHO in this case is to rewrite the pimples with raw, low
> tech pointers, avoiding the dependency.
>
> It's important for a test library to be as self-contained as possible.
>
>
How about what Beman suggested about including the current impl_ptr<> as an
implementation detail inside the Test library?
Do you think there could be some dark corners in impl_ptr<> that could cause
problems if used in this particular way?

Fernando Cacciola
Sierra s.r.l.
fcacciola_at_[hidden]
www.gosierra.com