Subject: Re: [boost] Review Manager needed for stacktrace library
From: Nat Goodspeed (nat_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-25 15:28:31
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 3:19 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?
> 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.
So okay, propose the frame type as immovable and let's see how
reviewers respond. I think it would be good if your documentation
explains the reasons for this decision: the tradeoffs you rejected.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk