On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Domagoj Saric <dsaritz@gmail.com> wrote:
"Emil Dotchevski" <emil@revergestudios.com> wrote in message news:AANLkTimenndg89tGkUepkP-5mizv_NtNEdh-DAkNG1Tv@mail.gmail.com...
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 7:49 AM, Domagoj Saric <domagoj.saric@littleendian.com> wrote:
What (de)coupling (and the related benefits) are you referring to? The ABI compatibility/stability and safe cross .DLL/.so passing arguments also used for the justification of the hardcoded dynamic deleter in shared_ptr or something else?
Yes, that ability is a result of the reduced coupling. One of the main objectives of boost::function is type erasure: being able to hold on to functions without knowing their exact type, and the allocator policy directly interfered with that.
Just like in the case of shared_ptr, I still don't buy this argument...: why would replacing hardcoded dynamic behaviour with configurability through policies 'interfere' with type erasure?
Because function<T,A1> is not the same type as function<T,A2>. Emil Dotchevski Reverge Studios, Inc. http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode