Ralph Tandetzky <ralph.tandetzky@googlemail.com> writes:
On 02/09/2013 04:39 PM, Alexander Lamaison wrote:
Daniel James <dnljms@gmail.com> writes:
On 9 February 2013 14:40, Alexander Lamaison <awl03@doc.ic.ac.uk> wrote:
Ralph Tandetzky <ralph.tandetzky@googlemail.com> writes:
On 02/09/2013 07:13 AM, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
I would really like to get feedback on the design of cow_ptr<T> <https://github.com/ralphtandetzky/cow_ptr.git> rather than discussing, if copy-on-write is a useful pattern in general. No doubt. As an author that's only natural. But this debate, about whether the library even needs to exist, is a necessary and vital part of the process, and keeps Boost the quality that it is.
Don't take the scepticism personally. It's just the way peer review works. Saying that COW is *never* needed is not scepticism, it's dogma. Maybe so, but the to-and-fro it causes is precisely what illuminates the issues involved for the rest of us. It doesn't really matter whether someone is being dogmatic or just playing devils advocate.
Alex @Daniel Thank you for your understanding.
@Alex You're right. I was just a bit annoyed. Sorry. As you put it, it really makes sense, Alex. Someone has to have a go at it in order to prove something to be right.
Nicely put.
It's not just about design, but also about the usefulness of this class in implementing copy-on-write.
Hang in there. I'm sure you'll get the technical critique you need. But most likely after the motivation hurdle has been passed. Alex -- Swish - Easy SFTP for Windows Explorer (http://www.swish-sftp.org)