Re: [boost] FW: ptr_container: ptr_map_adapter interface

From: David Maisonave (dmaisonave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-04 12:33:48

"Thorsten Ottosen" <tottosen_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:<dpgs2b$535$2_at_[hidden]>...
> Hi David,
> 
> Nice to know your name :-)

I rarely use my real name on the net, since most developers on the net
know me as Axter.
You'll ususally find me in the Experts-Exchange C++ topic are
(http://www.experts-exchange.com/Cplusplus/) or
CodeGuru/CodeProject/MSDN VC++ forums.
Although I participate in the C++ newsgroup, I prefer Web topic forums,
since it keeps out those who seem to loose all their manners as soon as
they connect to the internet. :-)

> 
> >>Note that DerivedDerivedS1/S2 does not implement do_clone().
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > Yes.  That's exactly the point I'm trying to make.
> > Both the boost pointer containers and the cow_ptr/copy_ptr method 
> > can result in splicing via improper usage.
> 
> right, if you don't make a class clonable in a proper manner, it wont 
> be
> cloned in a proper manner. <g>
> 
> > Both methods can produce splicing via derive-derive type, and both 
> > methods can produce splicing via derive type of a non-abstract type.
> > 
> > Furthermore, making the class non-copyable does not prevent the 
> > splicing in a pointer idiom.
> 
> I'm not sure this is called splicing.
> 
> I'd call it a bug.
> 

Yes, I call it a bug too, but I also call any code that produces
unwanted splicing a bug.