Hi Gerrit,
Gerrit Voss wrote:
>
> Not quite, the goal was to simplify things, not per se getting rid of
> something. So IMHO if 'getting rid' of something does not work towards
> the goal something should be changed.
True. The goal was to simplify the system, and one approach was to move
intelligence to the lower levels so that it is more automated and less
manual. That turned out to be more complicated than expected, but I
still think it's worthwhile, IMHO.
> where did the auto ptr go ?
We benchmarked it and there was no noticeable difference between passing
back a RefPtr or an auto_ptr, so we decided to scrap the auto_ptrs.
> Hmm, but in order to do this you record, transmit and apply ref count
> operations to the remote aspect (or has this changed, the code looks
> still the same ?). As you do it only for a limited set of objects/calls
> I still would call it an optimisation ;-). Because it should work if you
> do it for all objects/calls.
Well, the optimization is more a side effect, not the motivation. ;)
>> Yes, personally I find this very ugly.
>
> Good so I'm not alone ;-). Maybe we should take a step back and see if
> we can find a nicer user space solution ;-) Maybe we should really start
> from the user interface and work our way towards the core ;-)
Oh boy, going back to the drawing board. it's a good thing you're in
Singapore, or Carsten might go for your throat... I, on the other hand,
will have to go back to Louisiana tomorrow... ;)
> But than why not put the ref counting into fields instead of pointer
> classes. This way we get this part out of the normal class code (which
> AFAIK is the goal). And if you want to put the parent handling into the
> fields to you blow them up anyway.
Hm, would that help? Yeah, it might, and it might simplify a bunch of
other things. Grmbl, should have thought about that earlier. :(
> If you want to force the user to use ref ptrs you can still do so by
> returning a kind of auto ptrs from everything , the class interface and
> the fields. This currently is the solution I tend to find the best
> compromise.
>
> And it gives you more options to optimise internally without sacrificing
> a clean user interface.
I'm more worried about the latter than the former.
Dirk
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Opensg-core mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-core
