Re: [boost] ptr_container: ptr_map_adapter interface
You can eliminate performance implications by using a deep-copying smart pointer like the cow_ptr, which I previously posted. Moreover, I wouldn't be surprise if the cow_ptr was able to out
Thorsten Ottosen wrote: perform the
boost pointer containers.
I would. COW doesn't have a good reputation.
I agree with Thorsten and will be interested in the results of the tests. I think the ptr_containers need more work, but I don't think they should be replaced because something might be better. If an alternative proves to be better and is adopted by people, the ptr_containers will not be used and will be a footnote in history. In the meantime I think the competition between approaches is interesting. Brian www.webEbenezer.net
bwood wrote:
of the tests. I think the ptr_containers need more work, but I don't think they should be replaced because something might be better.
What do you think that needs to be done? On my plate for v2 is - allow auto_ptr<T> where T* is allowed today - serialization support - BOOST_PTR_CONTAINER_NO_EXCEPTIONS to remove all exceptions - allowing Derived to base conversion in transfer() - perhaps a little better initialization support, but I think this might belong in boost.assign -Thorsten
participants (2)
-
bwood -
Thorsten Ottosen