From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-07 22:21:10
> function_test and function_n_test test most of these, but without the
> user-supplied allocator. You could probably hack up those.
I'll take a look.
> Thanks for implementing this, and so quickly!
> Looking briefly through the code... I see that you're not actually
> storing the value of the allocator object itself along with the
> function object. Was that decision intentional, or were you just
> following the behavior of the existing boost::function?
I am storing the allocator, in struct functor_wrapper from
function_base.hpp, but it has a partial specialization for std::allocator
which doesn't store the allocator, and perhaps that's what you saw. Please
take another look:
Of course if the function object can use the small object optimization, the
functor_wrapper template is not used and no copy of the allocator is stored
in the boost::function.
> I haven't done a thorough review of the code, but I'd be inclined to
> move boost::function toward this approach. It's a better extension to
> tr1::function than the existing code, and it might be the right way
> for C++0x's "function" to go. If you're interested in this feature
> going into the next standard, I suggest writing a short proposal to
> the C++ Library Working Group for this extension.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk