Re: [boost] Pimpl Again?

Subject: Re: [boost] Pimpl Again?
From: Vladimir Batov (Vladimir.Batov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-06-09 20:11:31

On 06/10/2016 04:59 AM, Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>> ... The defining property of the
>> pimpl idiom is that the private implementation type is left 
>> incomplete in
>> the interface: the pointer is opaque...
>>
>> Emil

Just happened to re-read Gamma's "Design Patterns". The Bridge 
section... which is the Pimpl...

There the "hide the implementation" is mentioned in the Applicability 
section, i.e. what the pattern is good for... i.e. it's not the 
pattern's property... it's "only" its applicability... in the context of 
C++.

As for copy-on-write, then Gamma et al explicitly mention it... in the 
Proxy pattern... which they position separately from Bridge... they do 
not even mention it in the Related Section... which to me is a bit too 
subtle... but admittedly subtlety is not my strong suit.