Re: [boost] Proposal: Monotonic Containers

Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal: Monotonic Containers
From: Christian Schladetsch (christian.schladetsch_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-10 01:41:07

Hi Francois,

I didn't follow his proposal closely, but I believe that is exactly
> what Thorsten Ottosen proposed with his auto_buffer proposal, no?
> AFAIK he has offered a fairly polished implementation, which is now
> awaiting review.

This is the first I have heard of  Thorsten Ottose's auto_buffer proposal.
Do you have a link to it?

> As has been asked before by Frank Mori Hess in this thread, and as I
> don't believe you have answered yet, in what respects is your proposal
> better/different from Thorsten's auto_buffer?

My apologies if I overlooked that question. I do not recall seeing it.

The purpose of boost::monotonic is to allow containers to share the same,
fixed-size storage, and to not perform any memory management.

Objects can be created and destroyed, but the percentage of used storage
always monotonically increases. That fixed-size storage can come from either
the heap or the stack.

If auto_buffer does that, then yes there is a conflict and redundant effort.

> Thanks,
> François

Cheers,
Christian