Gennadiy Rozental wrote: > > > 2. Could type that implements swap() method somehow follow the second > case > > > road also? For example, could you somehow deduce T* from buffer and swap > > it > > > with local copy of the argument? > > > > Yes, I can look into such optimizations. But as I noted in previous > > messages, if I can prevent double-storage only for incomplete<T> (a point > on > > which I'm not certain is even true), it's probably not worthwhile. After > > all, sizeof(incomplete<T>) == sizeof(T*), so double-storage means > > 2*sizeof(T*). > > So the tradeoff here is extra 4 bytes for the object size plus double > indirection for all access operations. Here the question arise then why not > use virtual function based solution then? I bet it will be incomparably more > simple to understand and probably easier to use.
I'm not quite sure how virtual functions will solve anything, but I am eager to understand if indeed they will. Please explain. Thanks, Eric _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
