Feedback on __mt_alloc?

[Phil Edwards]

On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 08:19:42PM +0200, Stefan Olsson wrote:
> Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> 
> >>Looking at the current stl_alloc.h that would only be __malloc_alloc and 
> >>__debug_alloc right?
> >
> >I was thinking of moving them all over, so __pool_alloc would also be fair 
> >game.
> >
> Hmmm...
> ...so stl_alloc.h would only contain __new_alloc as required by the 
> standard? That would be really nice and clean!

Let's be more clear about this:  the standard doesn't require "stl_alloc.h"
nor "__new_alloc".  It just requires that the default container allocator
use new/delete.


> Where would the pool_alloc.h file (along with the other SGI specific 
> code such as __simple_alloc for _Alloc_traits etc) be included then for 
> "compability"? In stl_alloc.h?

I don't think we really gain anything by splitting them up, if we have
to go to each bits/* header and re-include them.  Or by including all the
new ones back into stl_alloc.h.

I think... hm.  I think I need to put the __N markup on hold, finish my
current documentaion updates, and then get back to work on redoing the
allocators.


> There are quite a few bits and pieces in the stl_alloc file that I'm 
> uncertain about what they do - or if they are used at all :(

Some of them are unused by the library; they're meant to be used by the user.


Phil

-- 
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace.  We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.            - Samuel Adams