Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [smart ptr] Any interest in copy-on-write pointer for C++11?
From: Alexander Lamaison (awl03_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-02-09 12:10:03

Ralph Tandetzky <ralph.tandetzky_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On 02/09/2013 04:39 PM, Alexander Lamaison wrote:
>> Daniel James <dnljms_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>> On 9 February 2013 14:40, Alexander Lamaison <awl03_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>> Ralph Tandetzky <ralph.tandetzky_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>>> On 02/09/2013 07:13 AM, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
>>>>> I would really like to get feedback on the design of cow_ptr<T>
>>>>> <> rather than
>>>>> discussing, if copy-on-write is a useful pattern in general.
>>>> No doubt. As an author that's only natural. But this debate, about
>>>> whether the library even needs to exist, is a necessary and vital part
>>>> of the process, and keeps Boost the quality that it is.
>>>> Don't take the scepticism personally. It's just the way peer review
>>>> works.
>>> Saying that COW is *never* needed is not scepticism, it's dogma.
>> Maybe so, but the to-and-fro it causes is precisely what illuminates the
>> issues involved for the rest of us. It doesn't really matter whether
>> someone is being dogmatic or just playing devils advocate.
>> Alex
> @Daniel Thank you for your understanding.
> @Alex You're right. I was just a bit annoyed. Sorry. As you put it, it
> really makes sense, Alex. Someone has to have a go at it in order to
> prove something to be right.

Nicely put.

> It's not just about design, but also
> about the usefulness of this class in implementing copy-on-write.

Hang in there. I'm sure you'll get the technical critique you need.
But most likely after the motivation hurdle has been passed.


Swish - Easy SFTP for Windows Explorer (

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at