Re: patch: mt_allocator.h

[Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>]

Dhruv Matani wrote:

> Think about it this way. Suppose it wasn't, and I used:
> list<int>;
> list<string>;
> list<float>;
>
> Then, under the current design, all would have their separate free-lists
> per thread! Which is obviously insane!
>  
Ok, ok, let's work on this assumption ;)

> > In any case, what about not splitting mt_allocator in a __gnu_internal::
> > part and a std:: part? 
> >    
> You mean a __gnu_internal and a __gnu_cxx part right?
>  
Indeed.

> > Can't we put *all* the implementation details
> > inside _Mt_alloc_base?
> >    
> Probably? Would you want me to try and do that?
Yes, please. Always both 'make check' and 'make check-performance', thanks.

Paolo.