From -1750125181623432028 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,c66ceaccc8f25e6b X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-18 13:22:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "James Kuyper Jr." Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Allocators, standard containers, and assignment Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 20:21:52 GMT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Approved: Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++ Message-ID: <3CBEB889.4CB46076@wizard.net> References: <42aba677.0203291151.ff4f74c@posting.google.com> <3ca4e319$0$20850$724ebb72@reader2.ash.ops.us.uu.net> <42aba677.0204051121.59ee7aca@posting.google.com> <3cae209e$0$19654$4c41069e@reader1.ash.ops.us.uu.net> <3CAE478F.ECDBDB2C@wizard.net> <3CAFB23E.A7A68E71@wizard.net> <3CB63333.A97E7E27@wizard.net> <3CBBA3CC.B434A21C@wizard.net> X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 1019161319 mail2news:4796 mail2news mail2news.demon.co.uk X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Mail2News-Path: news.demon.net!mulga.cs.mu.oz.au X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 07:02:19 CDT X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Lines: 34 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:10706 xleobx@qmailcomq.com wrote: .... > I do not want to fork the thread, so please refer to my answer to > Kevin S. Van Horn. ... I'm answering here, rather than on that branch, because more of my reply concerns the following statement, than anything you said in that message. > ... In brief, my point is (please ignore what I previously > said - it takes me time to distill what I mean) that containers, > as an abstract concept, do not (and should not) care about allocators, OK. The next question is, why? I think that your claim that they "do not .... care" is true to some extent, but only because most containers are currently not written to handle allocators that have inequivalent instances. However, it seems to me that containers should care about allocators, particularly when written to handle ones that allow inequivalent instances. In your reply to Kevin S. Van Horn you claimed that treating the allocator as part of the container's state is error prone. It's certainly error prone, if you aren't expecting it to be treated as part of the state. However, I don't think you've established the case that it would be more error-prone than the alternative would be, when used by developers who expect the container to treat the allocator whichever way it actually does treat it. --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]