mt_allocator issues.

[Stefan Olsson]

Hi Dhruv,

you are right. The original version was SGI style:
template<int __inst> class __mt_alloc
and since __inst was unused (and set to zero) there was only one 
instance. However this changed when it was turned into a standards 
compliant allocator:
template<typename _Tp> class __mt_alloc

As of right now (late saturday afternoon) I'm not sure if this is a good 
or bad thing, but it was never the less not originally intended this way!

Is it possible (through keywords/compiler options) to get the static 
members "application  wide" instead of one copy per template? Or do we 
have to define them elsewhere to get back to square one?

Brgds

/Stefan

Dhruv Matani wrote:

>Hello,
>
>Form the comments at the stat of the file:
> /**
>   *  This is a fixed size (power of 2) allocator which - when
>   *  compiled with thread support - will maintain one freelist per
>   *  size per thread plus a "global" one. Steps are taken to limit
>   *  the per thread freelist sizes (by returning excess back to
>   *  "global").
>
>But, it seems that currently, it is maintaining a freelist per size per
>thread per type on which it is being instantiated.
>
>Ok, I may be wrong, but just a hunch.
>
>Is this what was intended?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>