26 Apr
2003
26 Apr
'03
9:24 p.m.
--- In Boost-Users@yahoogroups.com, scleary@j... wrote:
-----Original Message----- [+] The object-related Allocator requirements (construct()/destroy ()) do not have anything to do with allocation/deallocation, and are generally considered to be a useless overspecification.
Thanks for taking the time to detail this. I think I get it. The object_pool interface is not what I want. If I extend the pool_allocator interface with a user-specifiable tag as you suggest, then that becomes a new singleton interface to a new, separate pool specific to my type (right?). Furthermore, if I were to purge_memory () on the underlying pool, what would get purged would be only the blocks allocated by the pool_allocator specific to my type. jh