Re: [boost] [function] function wrapping and exception safety recap

Subject: Re: [boost] [function] function wrapping and exception safety recap
From: Emil Dotchevski (emil_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-19 18:00:43

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Domagoj Saric <dsaritz_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> "Emil Dotchevski" <emil_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:AANLkTikGfE0KcMXjPMpqL-+12rUbouOrVGr1Rfgr_m_-_at_mail.gmail.com...
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Domagoj Saric <dsaritz_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Just like in the case of shared_ptr, I still don't buy this argument...:
>>> why
>>> would replacing hardcoded dynamic behaviour with configurability through
>>> policies 'interfere' with type erasure?
>>
>> Because function<T,A1> is not the same type as function<T,A2>.
>
> And? So is function<T1> not the same type as function<T2>...what difference
> does that make?

The difference is that the current boost::function interface does not
burden the user with having to remember the type of the allocator for
each individual function object. You could for example organize a
bunch of function<void()> objects in an array, even if each one of
them uses a different type of allocator.

What is the advantage of the function<T,A> interface anyway?

> The point is, AFAIK, to erase the type of the object you put
> into a boost::function<> instance, not the type of boost::function
> itself...after all unlike in Objective-C(++) in C++ everything has _some_
> type in the end...

Everything has a type, but the user doesn't have to know the type of everything.

Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.
http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode