From: Douglas Gregor (gregod_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-28 16:12:40
On Thursday 28 August 2003 04:40 pm, Gregory Colvin wrote:
> I also have no objection, and much sympathy, for having a clear
> memory management policy for Boost libraries. But again, it is a
> matter of people who care about and understand the issue doing the
> necessary work, just like everything else here at Boost.
Moreover, it's not a matter of convincing certain people that a clear memory
management policy should be adopted by Boost and handed down for developers
to do the work. Boost doesn't work that way. Policies always come from the
bottom up: someone has a problem, so they fix it in the libraries that matter
most to them. With that knowledge of _how_ to fix the problem correctly, they
can approach other developers and say "hey, I think we should fix this
problem in library X; here's how we did it in library Y". Eventually, most of
the libraries will support it, and _then_ we can approve it as a Boost
"policy" so that future libraries will follow it.
The most productive thing we could do right now would be to end this policy
discussion. Start with smart_ptr and address *specific* documentation and
*specific* implementation problems in this library, with resolutions specific
to that library. Is there a library that does it well? Reference that library
and state why it does it well, so that others may follow.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk