Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-06-26 09:16:07

Daniel James wrote:
> 2008/6/23 David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>:
>> A few litmus tests we could consider are the ability to work with
>>, the usual std::auto_ptr
>> implementations, and the one proposed in
> I don't expect to support everything that's out there. But
> std::auto_ptr is an important case.

I don't mean we should have OOTB support for everything out there, but
the ability to use external adaptation to make everything out there work
is at least a reasonable thing to think about.

>>> I think that's pretty much what Ion is proposing for the Interprocess
>>> containers.
>> Well, yeah, but I mean for the regular std:: containers
> You might have confused the Interprocess containers with the Intrusive
> ones. The Interprocess containers are STL containers with full
> allocator support. This is needed because most STL implementations
> only have the bare minimum so they won't work with the Interprocess
> allocators. There's some documentation at:
> and

Yep, I guess I had forgotten that. See my other recent posting, too:

Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at