Subject: Re: [boost] Review of a safer memory management approach for C++?
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-28 10:08:46
[Please don't top post. Try outlook-quotefix or oe-quotefix:
At Fri, 28 May 2010 15:32:22 +0200, Ingo Loehken wrote:
>> From: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
>> Furthermore, your logic seems flawed to me. By analogy:
>> There is no need for Intel processors (we can all use AMD).
>> Therefore there is no use for an Intel processor?
> No, thats a twisted interpretation. I'm just pointing out, there is a need
> for shared ownership.
I'm not sure I agree that there actually is a need. All the shared
ownership scenarios I can think of can be translated into
single-ownership-at-a-higher-level. That, however, is not always
-- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk