[boost] Re: Problem solved: EBO pessimization in smart_ptr not an issue anymore!

From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-05-03 15:20:54

"Andrei Alexandrescu" <andrewalex_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:aauoqv$aqq$1_at_main.gmane.org...
> "David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:aauihq$sul$1_at_main.gmane.org...
> > I see how c'tors are a problem all around.    I tried suggesting some
> > alternatives, but the problem is knowing which policies got inherited.
> > I'm wondering if the OptionallyInherit strategy can be made to work.
>
> Unless I'm missing a point, it can be made to work if the
OptionallyInherit
> template provides: a default constructor, a copy constructor that doesn't
> do anything, and a template constructor that doesn't do anything.

So did we decide that public or private inheritance is the way to go?
I would sure like to leverage the work on compressed_pair, because
it has a non-PTS implementation.  On the other hand, if I have to
add c'tors anyway, maybe we should just "borrow" the best parts of
compressed_pair to implement OptionallyInherits?

Dave