Re: [boost] Re: [pointer container] copyability

From: Rob Stewart (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-27 12:21:44

From: "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]>
> "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
> news:uk6mo2ylf.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
> | "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]> writes:
> |
> | > A "value object" implies something that behaves as an int; a
> | > "polymophic object" implies something that needs to allocated
> | > dynamically and which has virtual functions.
> |
> | A polymorphic object doesn't need to be allocated dynamically.
> 
> if you want it to act polymophic you have to.

Pass it to a function taking a reference to a base class; it acts
polymorphically.  Where the object is allocated is orthogonal.

> | > trying to make a polymorphic object behave like a value object is
> | > confusing a best.
> |
> | Who does it confuse?  Pimpl is a commonly used and well understood
> | pattern for doing just that.
> 
> Pimpl is an ugly hack for compilation firewalls.

Regardless of your opinion of the technique, Dave's statement
holds.

-- 
Rob Stewart                           stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer                     http://www.sig.com
Susquehanna International Group, LLP  using std::disclaimer;