[boost] Re: Re: Re: Basic guarantee and synchronized multipleupdates.

From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando_cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-27 12:18:35

"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:050c01c26642$038ca9a0$6501a8c0_at_boostconsulting.com...
>
> From: "Fernando Cacciola" <fernando_cacciola_at_[hidden]>
>
> > > I
> > > > always write:
> > > > handle new_object = old_object->clone(); // can throw.
> > > >
> > > > So I'm usually left with only contaier-reallocations to worry about.
> > >
> > > That's generally expensive, but whatever floats your boat...
> > >
> > It's a bit expensive, true, and definitely more verbose.
> > It just helps me to know that the copy does not provide the
> strong-guarantee
>
> ?? all your copies had better give the strong guarantee, or they won't
even
> give the basic guarantee.
>
Hmm.. OK, yes, you're right. I see it now.
And I also see that 'clone' is rather there just because I don't have
appropriately documented guarantees and I don't use all the appropriate
idioms.

Thanks for the educational remarks :-)

--
Fernando Cacciola