On Wednesday, February 05, 2003 9:32 AM [GMT+1=CET], Daniel Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pavel Vasiliev wrote: > > > > Conclusion: IMO, policy-based implementations like Loki::SmartPtr<> > > and "fixed" ones like boost::shared_ptr<T> or my refc_ptr<T> serve > > different needs. Do I say something new? Hardly. > > Hoare/Knuth: > > "Premature optimization is the root of all evil" > > Me: > > "Premature flexibility is the root of all evil" > > Stone me, Andrei :o) I don't think it's premature. There's certainly plenty of evidence by now that people want a variety of different smart pointers. I still have some questions which haven't been satisfied about how to get there, of course... -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
