Re: [boost] [gsoc] Request Feedback for Boost.Ustr Unicode String Adapter

Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc] Request Feedback for Boost.Ustr Unicode String Adapter
From: Gordon Woodhull (gordon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-08-12 21:21:05

On Aug 12, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Soares Chen Ruo Fei <crf_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>> What is your rationale for that?  What precedent is there for a
>> wrapper/adapter/facade that behaves like a pointer to the wrapped object?
>>  I'm not aware of any precedents; this is a new pattern to me.  Why have you
>> chosen to do this, rather than providing an accessor member like impl()?
> 
> Let's just say it's purely syntactic taste that I think can make ease
> of the transition without too much confusion. But since the method is
> just consist of a few lines of code why don't we just have a
> democratic vote on whether to keep operator *()? 

Not a vote.

> Actually I can't find any precedents that use this pattern as well, so
> I'm not sure whether it is a new pattern.

IIUC Vladimir Batov's Pimpl library works much like this. I don't know if it makes sense here, but you might want to take a look.