Re: [boost] Loki SmartPtr study: Policy orthogonality issues

From: joel de guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-12 00:15:08

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Abrahams" :

> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "joel de guzman" <djowel_at_[hidden]>
> 
> >
> > I think the problem is that C incorrectly combined the notion of
> > pointers and iterators (and even arrays) in one whole uncanny mix.
> > Are we trying to commit the same mistake again?
> 
> Too late: RandomAccessIterator already requires operator[]. At no small
> cost, BTW: see the iterator_adaptors library docs for a discussion of the
> limitiations!

So why propagate the mistake? Why do we need a smart-pointer 
with iterator/array semantics when we have iterators and containers. 
Vector not efficient enough? Why not just use a small and fast buffer 
class with array semantics and the efficiency of fixed C malloced 
arrays? Popular demand does not justify another mistake.

--Joel

PS> My opinions only... |:+ 
2c worth and may even be worthless.