Subject: Re: [boost] stack-allocated STL-containers
From: Stefan Strasser (strasser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-13 20:46:50
Am Friday 14 August 2009 00:24:54 schrieb Mathias Gaunard:
> > the vector operates on the stack as long as there is enough space, and
> > moves to the heap afterwards.
> > in most cases there is no dynamic allocation.
> An implementation is free to consider any instance of an allocator with
> the same arguments passed to the constructor as equal, IIRC.
> Does your allocator suffer from this issue?
I don't think so. the allocator doesn't have any state except a constant
pointer to "buffer"(see exmaple above), so multiple copies of the same
allocator can be used simultaniously.
the only c++ standard requirement it can't fulfil is a default constructor.
I'm not sure why that is needed though. but the standard says that
Allocator() must be a valid expression.
> Also, is the container still copyable properly?
yes. the only issue that might arise is that the buffer on the stack could go
out of scope before the vector has, as a result of swap()ing the contents of
the vector into another vector with a longer lifetime.
but I don't think that's a violation of the standard because that is also true
for other allocators, e.g. pool allocators.
Am Friday 14 August 2009 00:00:37 schrieb Christian Schladetsch:
> Two immediate issues are alignment and the fact that you are using a
> stateful allocator.
do you consider a constant pointer "stateful", and why is that a problem?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk