Daniel James wrote:
2008/6/23 David Abrahams <dave@boostpro.com>:
A few litmus tests we could consider are the ability to work with http://www.coderage.com/move_ptr, the usual std::auto_ptr implementations, and the one proposed in http://groups.google.com/group/comp.std.c++/msg/71e5799e3c1b70c7
I don't expect to support everything that's out there. But std::auto_ptr is an important case.
I don't mean we should have OOTB support for everything out there, but the ability to use external adaptation to make everything out there work is at least a reasonable thing to think about.
I think that's pretty much what Ion is proposing for the Interprocess containers. Well, yeah, but I mean for the regular std:: containers
You might have confused the Interprocess containers with the Intrusive ones. The Interprocess containers are STL containers with full allocator support. This is needed because most STL implementations only have the bare minimum so they won't work with the Interprocess allocators. There's some documentation at: http://tinyurl.com/4jyocx and http://tinyurl.com/3vxrt2
Yep, I guess I had forgotten that. See my other recent posting, too: http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3c486394D0.3040500%40boostpr... -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com