Re: [boost] [Root Pointer] Benchmark

Subject: Re: [boost] [Root Pointer] Benchmark
From: Rob Stewart (rstewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-03-14 11:27:36

On March 14, 2016 7:21:40 AM EDT, Phil Bouchard <philippeb8_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>I just re-added the unification of proxies so now root_ptr<>s can be 
>unified:
>
>https://github.com/philippeb8/root_ptr/blob/master/example/root_ptr_test1.cpp#L63
>
>It is pretty much bullet-proof now functionality wise.  But I still
>need to clean up the code.

I really wonder about that claim. You seem to keep changing design aspects, adding and removing things, so I wonder how comprehensive your tests are. (I realize that you may be adding more test cases in response to queries on this list, but the instability is worrisome.)

>Now I have a question: in my code I use a series of const_casts and 
>mutable qualifiers.  Does that automatically removes its eligibility
>for eventual inclusion into Boost?
>
>https://github.com/philippeb8/root_ptr/blob/master/include/boost/smart_ptr/root_ptr.hpp#L67

I can't tell which is line 67 via my phone, but taking an argument by reference to const and then casting away constness is always cause for concern.

___
Rob

(Sent from my portable computation engine)