Re: [boost] pool

From: Nathan Myers (ncm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-05-14 17:46:35

on 5/14/00 8:03 AM, John Maddock at John_Maddock_at_[hidden] wrote:

> 3) The allocator requirements permit containers to allocate memory 
> with one allocator and free with another un-related allocator (think 
> of list::splice for example), in fact the lifetime of allocated 
> memory can be independent of that of the allocator, I think this 
> kind of usage would crash your allocators (due in part to #1)?

This is not correct.  It allows you to deallocate memory using 
any allocator that compares equal to the one you got it from.
If your allocator has per-object state, this can mean that you
can only deallocate using the original allocator or a copy of it.

Actually, the above describes allocator requirements before they 
were weakened, but they describe how they will most likely later
be strengthened once the effects on list<>::splice etc. are worked
out.

Nathan Myers
ncm_at_[hidden]