Re: [boost] Re: Proposals: p2m offsets, prebuild<>, squad_ptr<>(ofcourse)

From: David (David_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-23 13:08:11

Your comments:
> It seems you cannot use it with typenames that easily; it depends on
virtual
> tables and you'll have to prepare your pointee type similarly to
> detail::counted_base derivatives.  I'm still not convinced this complexity
/
> benefits ratio is better.

don't apply to Loki::SmartPtr any better than they did to the BOOST
policy-Based Smart pointer. If you're familiar with Loki::SmartPtr then you
should be familiar with policy-based smart pointers, because Loki::SmartPtr
is an excellent example of one...

By "wrap typenames with a real class" I assume you mean that the user must
explicitly specialize the smartPtr with the name of a concrete class? This
hardly seems onerous- it is very simply usage of a templated class.

I'm afraid I don't understand your comment:
> It will become difficult to manage if you are pointing to a children of
> class inheriting mutiple times the same parent for example.

Please explain this- how does this affect using a smart ptr? Or the design
of a smart ptr?

David Brownstein

----- Original Message -----
From: "Philippe A. Bouchard" <philippeb_at_[hidden]>
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 10:18 AM
Subject: [boost] Re: Proposals: p2m offsets, prebuild<>,
squad_ptr<>(ofcourse)

> I was talking about Loki::SmartPtr.  I'm not familiar with policy-based
> smart pointers but I suspect it is template-based?  If so it would still
be
> more complex to use because you'll have to wrap typenames with a real
class.
> It will become difficult to manage if you are pointing to a children of
> class inheriting mutiple times the same parent for example.  Which counter
> will it use under badly designed projects like this one?  Can it be
applied
> to TrollTech's QListView for example?
>
> "Gennadiy Rozental" <rogeeff_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:ahk137$i4n$1_at_main.gmane.org...
> >
> > "Philippe A. Bouchard" <philippeb_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > news:ahk0in$gk6$1_at_main.gmane.org...
> > > It seems you cannot use it with typenames that easily; it depends on
> > virtual
> > > tables and you'll have to prepare your pointee type similarly to
> > > detail::counted_base derivatives.  I'm still not convinced this
> complexity
> > /
> > > benefits ratio is better.
> >
> >
> > I am not sure what you meant as "it", but if it is Policy-Based smart
> > pointer then both your statements are incorrect.
> > 1. Framework does not have virtual functions and virtual tables
> accordingly
> > ( though resulting smart pointer may have, depends on policies
> > implementation)
> > 2. It has nothing to do with counted_base (at least my version)
> >
> > Gennadiy.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
> >
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost