Subject: Re: [boost] Review Manager needed for stacktrace library
From: Antony Polukhin (antoshkka_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-25 15:19:49
2016-10-25 22:17 GMT+03:00 Nat Goodspeed <nat_at_[hidden]>:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Antony Polukhin <antoshkka_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> 2016-10-25 22:00 GMT+03:00 Nat Goodspeed <nat_at_[hidden]>:
>>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Antony Polukhin <antoshkka_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>> Is it ok to have a nonmovable type for a stack frame?
>>> Could it be move-only?
>> So a copy of
>> `frame` becomes invalid after the stacktrace destruction.
> Maybe a frame should be a weak_ptr<internal_class>, accessed with
> pointer semantics?
Memory allocation will happen for each backend in that case, so users
would like to specify allocators... and that's what I'd like to avoid
even more than dangling references.
-- Best regards, Antony Polukhin
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk