Martin Sebor wrote:
Lance Diduck wrote:
To all: Here is an issue that may impact stdcxx.
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1850.pdf
[...]
I skimmed the paper but I suspect I'll need to re-read it and spend
some time playing with the proposed classes to get a better
understanding of it. I'll try to do that before the end of the month
(i.e., before the October WG21 meeting) and post my feedback here.
Okay, I've re-read Pablo's paper and the comp.std.c++ thread (below)
and here are my first thoughts:
I agree that the allocator model has serious problems and I like some
(although not all) aspects of the proposed solution. I have serious
reservations about switching from stateless to polymorphic allocators
as the default. I also share Howard's concern about the extent of the
proposed changes to the library. In addition, intuitively I feel that
it should be possible to solve the general problem in a less invasive
way.
Martin
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.std.c++/browse_thread/thread/574518e5c7a60feb/ffb77430957a71df
