From: Frank Mori Hess (frank.hess_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-09 20:13:24
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 09 April 2008 17:26 pm, Daniel Frey wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 17:06 -0400, Frank Mori Hess wrote:
> > think of. Of course, you would still be inflicted with a vtable, but
> > that doesn't add any per-object space overhead, which seems to be what
> > you're most concerned about.
>
> A vtable means that the per-object size *does* grow, since each object
> needs a pointer to the vtable.
Oh, yeah. Well, it could be done generically too without even a vtable, if
shared_ptr recognized a template class which the user could define
specializations of.
- --
Frank
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFH/Vus5vihyNWuA4URAo4dAJ9gD9mtfHp2Azvr5ejGWAzPMiFxDACfUo2H
8nDJsrABHOCnou+rFEuYhuw=
=UtPP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----