Re: [boost] Re: SmartPtr (Loki) - auto_ptr/move c'tor issue

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-30 17:19:08

At 04:55 PM 1/29/2003, David B. Held wrote:

 >"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
 >news:u8yx3hcp2.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
 >> [...]
 >> Then you've indeed got a problem.  There were indications in
 >> some of Beman's earlier explorations that the orthogonal policy
 >> decomposition wasn't always a natural one.  This might be another
 >> clue.
 >
 >Indeed.  My new suggested change involves breaking orthogonality
 >in a way that I think even Beman suggested, if memory serves me
 >correctly.

IIRC, the idea was than there should still be separate policies, and that 
it was good programming practice not to arbitrarily break design 
orthogonality. But the policies could intercommunicate directly, so if 
there was sufficient reason to break orthogonality, it wasn't impossible.

Andrei absolutely enforced orthogonality by only allowing 
intercommunication through a specific interface, IIRC.

Which is the best approach is very application dependent. I never came to a 
firm conclusion as to which approach was better for smart pointers; both 
have advantages.

--Beman