Re: [boost] ASIO into the standard (was: Re: C++ committee meeting report)

On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Neil Groves wrote:

...

On 4 Jul 2014, at 10:47, Jonathan Wakely wrote:

...

On 1 July 2014 22:45, Felipe Magno de Almeida wrote:

...

I would hope Allocators would be added to ASIO in the standard. It is difficult to limit memory usage without Allocators in embedded systems.

I hate this recurring theme of "let's take something that works well today and then fsck it up by insisting it has allocator support”

Since I am far less familiar with these issues than you are the solution to avoiding detriment to designs by having allocator support is not obvious to me. What should we do instead of adding allocator support? Should we be improving the standard allocator like the implementations in Boost.Container, or are you suggesting that any standardisation of the allocator Concept would lead to a deterioration of the design? My own view is that the standard allocator is clearly suboptimal even for standard containers. This is evident from the performance improvements obtained in Boost.Container. I have noticed though that the improved allocators do not provide superior performance on Linux systems over the standard implementations. I’m very interested in your proposed solutions as I suspect there is much to learn from your experience working on the standard library implementations.

As a quick side-note, there have been recent C++ proposals for improving the situation, like N3525[1]. (I don't know if Boost.Container already have similar features.)

[1] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2013/n3525.pdf

Another side-note: This proposal is part of the Library Fundamentals TS v1, currently in PDTS. see https://isocpp.org/std/status for more details, and the "Work Items by Subgroup"-tab for the working paper Mats Taraldsvik

_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost