From: Gregory Colvin (gregory.colvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-29 20:59:46
On Friday, Aug 29, 2003, at 18:16 America/Denver, E. Gladyshev wrote:
> I'd like to start a new thread with Gregory's suggestion
> and my comments.
> Gregory Colvin wrote:
>> * use the standard mechanisms (::operator new or std::allocator)
>> when it is necessary
> Boost already has boost::allocator. IMO other boost libaries
> should consider using boost::allocator instead of
> ::new and std::allocator.
There is a tradeoff between possibly better performance and possibly
>> * parameterize only when there is a clear advantage to doing so
> I'd modify it to
> * Consider parametrization if your library is to be available
> for embedded or non-traditional platfroms.
Even on "traditional" platforms there may reason to parameterize, and
there may be alternatives to parameterization even on embedded plaforms.
>> * use the standard parameterization mechanisms (Allocator) when
>> choosing to parameterize
> I'd add to it
> * Follow boost::allocator specification for allocator parameters
Which specification is that? There are several here:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk