On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:27 AM Gavin Lambert via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 27/06/2019 18:11, JeanHeyd Meneide wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 12:23 AM Gavin Lambert wrote:
And "UB-based optimization" does not inspire confidence.
There is nothing I can do for standard pointers other than to give up the optimization or to use the UB. (This is one of the reasons it was proposed to the standard, asides from being an existing practice with wide implementation experience.)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the clever implementation appears to depend on several #defines which are entirely undocumented. ... And the "clever" version of inout_ptr is enabled by default, with all of these undocumented choices.
Yes, that was an oversight on my part. It's been corrected in the post-review branch, with full documentation: https://github.com/ThePhD/out_ptr/blob/feature/boost.review/docs/out_ptr/con... The library prefers the fast version by default. It has a configuration option to choose where the clever optimization might look for the pointer value. Given feedback, I think it would be better to maybe have it off by default: that's a small change to flipping how the configuration macros work right now. So far the only reported failures come from libc++ using this clever optimization. This was patched in to be fixed in the post-review branch, but I can't merge such changes to Master until the review is over. Sincerely, JeanHeyd