Boost logo

Boost :

From: Reid Sweatman (drunkardswalk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-10 23:58:51

Yeah, you can; you just need one of the shareware unzippers like WinZip.
They do it in stages in a temp location, but they'll do it.

Reid Sweatman

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of
> cppljevans_at_[hidden]
> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 6:29 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [boost] Re: new_policied (was Re: shifted_ptr review)
> On 10/10/2003 04:15 PM, Fernando Cacciola wrote:
> >
> licied.tar.gz
> >
> > I can't read .tar files in XP.
> > If you can add a .zip I can look at it.
> I added a which contains the new_policied.cpp code as well
> as a new test, smart_ptr.cpp, showing how to use with a policied smart
> pointer. Hopefully it can be adapted for use with David Held's code.
> Anyway, it highlights the memory advantages of the shifted_ptr method.
> The only advantage is w.r.t. the number of vertices. As shown by
> smart_ptr.cpp, the memory required is E*2*sizeof(void*) (where E =
> the number of "Edges" [pointers] in the pointer graph) which is
> the same as for hared_ptr), + V*(sizeof(vtbl*)+sizeof(deleter*)+
> 2*sizeof(refcount)) which, compared with that shown in,
> shows an size advantage over shared_ptr of 1 sizeof(void*). The
> uploaded code did not include room for the deleter or weak count, but
> I added them in the above analysis.
> Fernando, I had another problem with the preprocessor macros. If you
> look at the code just uploaded, you'll note some duplication of
> code. The 2 macros:
> are almost the same. I tried creating another macro with the common
> elements; however, it didn't work. Is there some way of doing
> this to save duplicate coding?
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:

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