11 Mar
2008
11 Mar
'08
8:23 a.m.
"Steven Watanabe" <watanabesj@gmail.com> wrote in message news:47D549EE.6050303@providere-consulting.com... [...]
If I remember correctly from the Intrusive review, virtual inheritance can make roofof blow up.
Unfortunately, yes. I would be possible adding a BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT the resulting pointer address is lesser than the member variable inside the function but obviously this will not be portable. Here is a list of things that still need to be done: - Replace owned<>::p_ with boost::optional<> - Add user-defined destructor to the pointee - Multi-threaded support - More aggresive internal usages of roofof<>() - Struct "set" and owned_base::last allocated from a private pool - make_shifted_ptr<>() That's about it I believe. -Phil