Re: [boost] [Root Pointer] New Documentation

Subject: Re: [boost] [Root Pointer] New Documentation
From: Phil Bouchard (philippeb8_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-04-13 22:01:44

On 04/13/2016 10:10 AM, Peter Dimov wrote:
> Phil,
>
> You still haven't answered my earlier questions, which were
>
> - in what scenarios would one use root_ptr and in what node_ptr,
> - what happens when one doesn't observe the above guidelines

I think I tried to answer your questions with the following examples:
http://philippeb8.github.io/root_ptr/root_ptr/tutorial.html#root_ptr.tutorial.intermix

> Perhaps you didn't understand the questions, so I'll go into more detail.
>
> "Root" is GC terminology. It refers to the pointers from which tracing
> starts (those on the stack, in static variables, in registers.)
>
> So by your calling root_ptr root_ptr, I can deduce that you intend
> root_ptr to be used for root pointers, and node_ptr to be used for
> non-root pointers.
>
> Meaning, if we go by classic GC terminology, that automatic and static
> variables should be root_ptr, and the rest should be node_ptr. Right?

Right but root_ptr can be class members as well (container roots for 
example).

> If that's correct, my question is then what happens when you use
> node_ptr for roots, and root_ptr for non-roots. That is, what happens
> when you use node_ptr as an automatic or a static variable (currently a
> dangling pointer, as we learned in a previous post) and what happens
> when you use root_ptr for a non-root pointer.
>
> Specifically, in
>
>     R1 -> N1 <-> N2
>
> N1 and N2 are destroyed when R1 is destroyed. But what happens in
>
>     R1 -> R2 <-> R3

The cycle will not be destroyed there because cycles between sets 
themselves aren't detected.

> or in
>
>     R1 -> R2 <-> N3

This cycle will get destroyed.
This is because you can have subroots (root pointing to a subroot).

> or in
>
>     R1 -> N2 <-> R3
>
> when R1 is destroyed?

This cycle will not get destroyed.