On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 11:20:03 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
<[email protected]> wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:41:19 -0400, Rainer Deyke <[email protected]>
wrote:
Proxies, especially proxies that add functionality to their base type,
cannot act exactly like the type they are proxying. Using a proxy
therefore requires the significant mental overhead of keeping track of
all the corner cases in which the proxy does not act like the type it
is
proxying, as well as the hassle of working around those limitation
whenever they come up.
They can act like the base type up to a point. You make it sound like
a chore to use a wrapper type, but the truth is they are easy to use,
there are not that many cases to worry about.
My experience with wrappers in C++ has been similar to Rainer's.
Essentially you can't define "smart references" in C++. I hope we were
or will be able to fix that with the "alias this" feature.
My experience with Proxy objects in .Net remoting has been good. Granted,
it's not a true wrapper, since the object has to derive from a certain
base class, but it works very seamlessly without much effort. I guess
it's a matter of how much you expect from your wrapper.
I also agree that C++ doesn't allow complete smart references, but we
aren't dealing with C++ here, are we :)
-Steve
