Re: [boost] Re: SmartPtr (Loki) - auto_ptr/move c'tor issue

[Beman Dawes]

At 04:55 PM 1/29/2003, David B. Held wrote:

>"David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> [...]
>> Then you've indeed got a problem. There were indications in
>> some of Beman's earlier explorations that the orthogonal policy
>> decomposition wasn't always a natural one. This might be another
>> clue.
>
>Indeed. My new suggested change involves breaking orthogonality
>in a way that I think even Beman suggested, if memory serves me
>correctly.

IIRC, the idea was than there should still be separate policies, and that it was good programming practice not to arbitrarily break design orthogonality. But the policies could intercommunicate directly, so if there was sufficient reason to break orthogonality, it wasn't impossible.

Andrei absolutely enforced orthogonality by only allowing intercommunication through a specific interface, IIRC.

Which is the best approach is very application dependent. I never came to a firm conclusion as to which approach was better for smart pointers; both have advantages.

--Beman

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost