From: Pavel Vozenilek (pavel_vozenilek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-10 12:21:48
"Rob Stewart" wrote:
>> > 1. Creator policy is redundant with the standard Allocator concept, I
>> > think. Though the standard Allocator concept has some subtle, tricky
>> > semantics, I think it's nevertheless worth using: that would permit
>> > interoperability with existing allocator implementations.
>> Thinking it again: you are likely right here.
>> Handling of constructor arguments could be separated
>> from allocation.
> I don't know about that, but perhaps an adapter could be provided
> to make a standard allocator look like a creator?
I should be possible w/o adapter. Just expecting std::allocator like
parameter in template.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk