Re: [boost] Proposal: Monotonic Containers

Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal: Monotonic Containers
From: Christian Schladetsch (christian.schladetsch_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-17 21:36:12

Apologies in advance, I realise I am on the verge of spamming and will not
continue.
>
>
> I've also had the presumptiveness to assume that in a vector of lists, the
> lists should use the same allocator as the vector. [...] It cannot be fixed
> because STL implementations do not always call allocator.construct() after
> allocator.allocate().
>

Somehow I managed to debunk myself in the space of three paragraphs. It is
not possible to do what I wanted even with lists or vectors, let alone map.

The reason that I risked this final post is to propose that boost needs a
collection library that correctly deals with allocators. This would also
have helped with boost::interprocess.

The current state of affairs is painful in many respects. A lot of things
would be fixed by boost::map, boost::list, boost::vector etc that wrap
std::container but correctly use std::allocators, or even better, a
boost::allocator model that is a superset of std::allocator.

There are many many issues with this, I realise. For instance, what to do
with allocators in operator=, copy-construction using a different allocator
from the original and so on.

Anyway, you guys arent the only ones that are getting tired of this, so..

Cheers,
Christian.