Re: [boost] Re: Querying usefulness of a macro forinheritingfromSTLcontainers

From: christopher diggins (cdiggins_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-27 18:46:26

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Querying usefulness of a macro 
forinheritingfromSTLcontainers

> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 15:59:19 -0500, christopher diggins wrote
>
>> > Now if you had policy-based
>> > collections that would support full inheritability as an option and
>> > implemented standard container interfaces -- that might be interesting 
>> > ;)
>> >
>> > Jeff
>>
>> What kinds of policies would like to see?
>
> Well inheritability is one.  Allocation policies that work (I'm no expert 
> but
> some people think the current standard allocator is flawed). Element 
> ownership
> would be another.  So if I have a collection of pointers and I want them
> destroyed with the collection.  Of course I think we have another boost
> library that is now covering this space.  There is probably some use for a
> thread locking policy, although it is probably less useful than it might
> appear since is usually more efficient in classes that wrap standard 
> collections.
>
> Once upon a time we had at least some discucssion of this:
>
> http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg24761.php
>
> Anyway, overall I'm not sure it's really worth going down this path.

I am already pretty much committed to writing a set of tools for wrapping 
and forwarding to STL containers. The way I plan on doing this is by writing 
a set of macros for forwarding STL member functions to member fields (which 
can also forward to a private or protected super-class). Once this is done, 
then it will be trivial to also write a set of safely inheritable STL 
containers. After that I figure someone else may get motivated to write 
policy-based STL containers, which I think would be easier given a nice set 
of macros.

> I'm
> actually much more interested in seeing things like the tree container in
> boost.  Also, I think you and I probably have unfinished business to make
> constrained_value a stand-alone library.

Yes, I haven't forgotten. I still have the code posted at 
http://www.cdiggins.com/constrained_value.hpp . I just keep getting 
distracted by side projects. I still need to write a decent test suite and 
document the thing. Unfortunately it is at the bottom of my to-do pile.

>> PS: if you don't mind debanning me from the wiki my ip address is
>> 66.130.149.217
>
> Done.  I got tired of the spam coming from 66.*.*.* so I banned them 
> all --
> sorry that was way too aggressive. I've removed all these 'aggressive 
> bans'
> for now to see how it goes.

Thank you.

CD