Boost logo

Boost :

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
unwanted dependancies.

> ...
>> * 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, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at