Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-01 15:48:43

Gregory Colvin <gregory.colvin_at_[hidden]> writes:

>>> Conforming containers had better use them.
>> I'm sorry, but I think that's flat wrong. What do you suppose that
>> entry in column 2 of the allocator requirements table (20.1.5) means,
>> after all?
> It means any value returned by construct, destroy, or deallocate goes
> unused.
>>> And once you are down in the coal mine customizing what a pointer
>>> is, I'm not sure you won't need to customize how to construct and
>>> destroy.
>> The class getting constructed/destroyed has full control over that or
>> the language is utterly bustificated.
> Yes, but the allocator may want to do something else as well, and
> construct and destroy serve as hooks for whatever that may be.

Regardless, there is absolutely _nothing_ in the standard AFAICT which
indicates the containers must use the allocator's construct and
destroy, and several implementations in fact do not.

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at