From: Gregory Colvin (gregory.colvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-27 16:25:51
On Wednesday, Aug 27, 2003, at 14:46 America/Denver, Joerg Walter wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gregory Colvin" <gregory.colvin_at_[hidden]>
>>> I'd a bit suprised if the C++ committe
>>> accepts Boost memory management concept
>>> (or a complete lack of such) as
>>> an industry standard.
>> It already has:
> What a mistake?
I don't think so. As Dave said, there are already existing library
components whose use of dynamic memory is not parameterized. So I
can't see refusing new components on that basis.
That doesn't mean Boost shouldn't have a more explicit policy, but
I doubt that simply parameterizing everything with an allocator is
the way to go.
It also doesn't mean the standard shouldn't have a more explicit
policy, but achieving one will be non-trivial.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk