This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Less good ;-) results from Rittle's string allocator



> Right.  I guess what I'm saying is that in most cases as stay strictly
> standard as much as possible, but I'd like to have a nice memory pool
> allocator.  The library has one that I'm willing to use as an
> extension.  My alternative is to write/find another one, which also
> wouldn't be standard, so I'm no worse off.

I think it makes sense to have this as a well-supported extension.

> In summary, what I'm asking is that since the memory pool logic in the
> library is nice, well-optimized, well-maintained, and bug-free (?),
> it'd be nice to expose it as an extension since I'd have to go make
> one or find one anyway.  I would be forever greatful :)

I like this idea.

-benjamin


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]