On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:04:31 -0400, bearophile <[email protected]>
wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer:
Scope class members should solve this. It's been thrown around forever
--
essentially, you should be able to define that a class member's storage
is
contained within the owner object.
I too have proposed this idea, but in my opinion you can't design a big
part of a standard lib on the base of a syntax/language optimization
that doesn't exists yet.
Yeah, but essentially, it's an optimization. Whether the storage is
stored in the same heap block or a different one really doesn't matter in
terms of functionality. Allocating one heap block vs. two is faster,
that's what the OP was saying.
In other words, scope class members aren't essential to using dcollections.
-Steve
