From -7681100358832460051 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,8e45f00ca435d49d X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public From: James Kuyper Subject: Re: fundamental allocator design question. Date: 2000/05/26 Message-ID: <392D1EA2.973DBAB2@wizard.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 627220218 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Approved: Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++ References: X-Accept-Language: en,de,es,ru X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Mail2News-Path: news.demon.net!mulga.cs.mu.oz.au X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 959271950 mail2news:14894 mail2news mail2news.demon.co.uk Organization: Not Enough X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) MIME-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 08:30:53 EDT Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Marc D Bumble wrote: > > Is there an oversight in the allocator definitions? Allocators take > one template type parameter. The allocator then provides memory > having the same type as specified by its single parameter. And all of > this works well. However, it might be beneficial if the allocator > also took a second parameter which described the type of the allocator > itself. For instance, a user could specify: > > allocator > allocator > allocator std::allocator<> takes a template type parameter, but the general allocator requirements in section 20.1.5 make no mention of template parameters. They don't say that a type parameter is needed, and they don't prohibit the presence of additional parameters. --- [ 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://reality.sgi.com/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html ]