Subject: Re: [boost] [context] mini-review comments
From: Oliver Kowalke (oliver.kowalke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-01-14 03:38:26
Am 13.01.2012 23:22, schrieb Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr.:
> Hmmm...I would consider that an oversight. Any operation (like
> calling operator new) which changes global state should be documented
> as such. With operator new, you're (likely) changing the amount of
> free store space, there's possibly the acquisition of locks
> (depending on implementation), and, I don't know, maybe some other
> effects observable outside of the local context. If you put the pimpl
> in the stack space via the stack allocator, then that changes
> whatever state the stack allocator has outside of the constructor.
> Example: If I write a merge sort function that allocates extra
> temporary scratch space, I would consider the documentation
> incomplete if it didn't mention where that scratch space is retrieved
> from. [...]
Hmmm - I've some doubt to buy this. AFAIK the STL documentation does not
define how vector, list etc. should be implemented - it is up to the
implementor and how it is implemented may change between platforms/vendors.
> > I don't think it's a good idea to guarantee (as much as one is able
> > to,
> >> anyway) a one-size-fits-all default stack size for all present
> >> and future platforms for all time and across all dimensions and
> >> parallel universes.
> > default_stacksize() was only introduced for more comfort for the
> > lib users. I could also remove this function - but some user might
> > ask what stacksize they should use.
> I'm simply pointing out that the documented semantics of
> default_stacksize() strike me as over-specified ("256 kB", regardless
> of platform), and I was (implicitly) asking, e.g., if you had
> considered this. Based on your above comment, it appears I didn't
> make my point clear enough...
so you suggest to remove it? sorry - I don't get it.
> Do you know, by chance, how to determine the
> (default?) stack size on Windows (7, specifically)?
I'm sorry I don't know. It should be the stack size the Windows
applications take by average?
Maybe 256kB might be OK.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk