On 01/11/06, John Maddock <john@johnmaddock.co.uk> wrote:
I don't know about address, but you are allowed to assume that all allocators compare equal. Does that help?
I've been trying to fully support allocators in order to support allocators such as the one from Ion's shared memory library. I realise that most implementations don't do this so it's probably not vital. And it's still an open issue how swap should be implemented: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#431 Allocator::address is actually the more important issue, as I use it to destruct nodes. If it can throw I really should change the implementation so that it doesn't. While I'd prefer not to, it's not too bad. I'll have to remove an optimisation for iteration. Also, I'm constructing the value in nodes separately from the pointers, in order to avoid an extra temporary, but I won't be able to destruct them separately. It feels wrong to destruct them in a different manner to their construction, but I don't think it'll cause any problems in practise. Daniel