Subject: Re: [boost] Pimpl Again?
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-06-08 17:57:31
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 2:29 PM Rainer Deyke <rainerd_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 3. I want a class to have value semantics, but use a copy-on-write
> implementation behind the scenes.
Pimpl is not about semantics, it's about reducing physical coupling. It's
not about the pointer pointing at the private implementation object (which,
being private, is an implementation detail anyway), it's about the private
implementation *type* being left incomplete.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk