From: joel falcou (joel.falcou_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-07 04:10:59
Some remarks and questions :
> 3) In general box aims to be
as simple as possible, sticking
> with fixed size containers and
no container copying.
Then why not enforcing this by having the size
passed as a template parameters ?
> A) Allocators are a
complex and often misunderstood type, and it is
> not felt it
makes things easier for users to give a different allocator to
vector as opposed to defining a new class.
I don't think exposing
such low level behavior (alloca calls and such) is a good
either. An allocator definition helper class is maybe best suited then.
What if i want a std::list or some other complex data structure using
I will still be forced to write an allocator and not using
> In particular, getting correct behaviour for the copy
> the container is difficult, and it is not
possible to give a correct
> definition of max_size, which is more
important for small-sized
Why exactly ?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk