18 Dec
2012
18 Dec
'12
12:29 a.m.
Dave Abrahams wrote:
Hmm, it will be interesting to see how this works. Now that the weasel-wording is gone, the allocator's pointer type, etc., have specific meanings that might not be compatible with stack memory.
Could you please elaborate? Isn't it always a pointer to a type passed to the allocator? How it may be treated differently for stack memory? Regards, Adam