Re: [Boost-users] Factory pattern ?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Factory pattern ?
From: Jeremy Pack (rostovpack_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-10-23 12:50:28

Maik,

Sorry for the slow answer, I'm on vacation this week. I may get time to look
at it in more depth in a few days.
Fast answer:

I agree.

1 - The shared_library and type_map classes handle much of what you want for
DSO. I'm still working on a few convenience functions for the shared_library
class, and working on adding some safety mechanisms to help avoid problems
with binary incompatibility. Is there any specific functionality you'd like
to see that may not be there?

2 - There are very few interdependencies between classes in the library.
Many of the classes require either the type_map class or the type info
functionality, but there are few, if any, other interdependencies. This
means that the library could be split up well in quite a number of ways. I
hope to resolve the question of whether or not to split the library during a
pre-review process.

Jeremy Pack

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 3:03 AM, Maik Beckmann <beckmann.maik_at_[hidden]
> wrote:

> 2008/10/21 Jeremy Pack <rostovpack_at_[hidden]>:
> > Oliver,
> > It depends on what you need the factories to do. Could you describe your
> use
> > case in more detail?
> > Boost.Extension is for using factories to create objects of classes
> declared
> > in shared libraries.
> > Jeremy Pack
>
>
> Hi Jeremy,
>
> During the last weeks I've spend some hour on boost.extension.
>
> Organizing factories is what boost.extension is all about at the
> moment. But I think means for portable loading of DSO (Dynamic Shared
> Objects) are worth a project on its own.  Consider this structure
>  - boost.dso
>    - portable dlopen
>    - convenience classes for resource handling
>  - boost.extension
>    - factory pattern
>    - reflection pattern
>
> boost.dso will IMHO be suitable for many developers out there having
> their own factories running, but like to have a well tested and
> portable dlopen (aka. LoadLibrary on MS Windows).  Providing this
> needs a heavy testing harness which will take a notable amount of
> developer time.
>
> boost.extension itself can concentrate on how to plug and organize
> loaded code into an application.
>
> What do you think?
>
> -- Maik
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>