Re: [boost] Two alined_storage classes in the CVS

From: Joaquín Mª López Muñoz (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-04 09:25:00

John Maddock ha escrito:

> > With the recent addition of TR1 aligned_storage to
> > Boost.TT, there's a nasty collision with a class named
> > exactly the same and living in boost/aligned_storage.hpp
> > (this class is a spin-off from Boost.Variant, IIRC.)
> > I think this has been discussed some months ago, but
> > with no resolution to the best of my knowledge.
> >
> > Apart from the symbol clash, these two classes do not
> > provide the same functionality, so I guess it'd be sensible
> > to rename the older aligned_storage to something else.
> > Ideas?
>
> Darn, normally I'd say that the older version has priority over the name,
> however in this case since aligned_storage is part of the TR, I'm leaning
> toward agreeing that we should rename the old version.

I think this is the only reasonable option.

>
>
> I notice that the old version isn't documented anywhere, but I also note
> from the mailing list that at least one person is using it in his/her own
> code.

I did a grep and it is used by multi_index, serialization and variant.
Boost.Optional uses and internal version cut&pasted from
boost/aligned_storage.hpp, and Boost.Python uses a class named with
the same name (differente namespace) but with a seemingly different
implementation tecnhique.

So, apparently there's only three libraries to be updated. As for the name,
I like the "aligned_buffer" proposal by Jonathan.

HTH

Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo

>
>
> So I'm not sure how best to handle this, Eric, any thoughts?
> John.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost