From: Li Lirong (lirong_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-04 21:39:09
Robert Ramey wrote:
> Dave Abrahams
>>What's the point of doing that when you could just keep the
>>un-serialized objects in your undo stack?
> Indeed. I responded to the original question about how to
> do it without considering why one would want to. I would
> like to hear from the original poster as to what his
> motivation is.
There are two reasons.
First, the object is referenced elsewhere in the programme. It is not
safe to simply replace the pointer with another object.
Second, the object itself keeps some pointers to other objects.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk