Re: [boost] Should Boost adopt pimpl/d-pointer as much as it can?

Subject: Re: [boost] Should Boost adopt pimpl/d-pointer as much as it can?
From: Christopher Jefferson (chris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-26 11:08:44

On 26 Mar 2010, at 14:48, Artyom wrote:

>> 
>>> 2) Any non-template based class should have
>> opaque/d/pimpl pointer in its
>>>   body.
>> 
>> I would most strongly disagree. The reason is, of course,
>> efficiency. 
> 
> Ok, let it make more clear. If you want Boost to be ever stable
> library as Qt, GLib, STL you need this. This would allow to extend
> the class in future without breaking ABI.

I do not know of any implementation of the STL which is pimpl. With the exception of some parts of string and iostreams, they are also all header-only. pimpl is over-rated for not breaking the ABI. 

Chris