List:MySQL++« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Jonathan Wakely Date:June 15 2009 8:34am
Subject:Re: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?
View as plain text  
On 14/06/2009, Kevin Regan wrote:
> By singleton, I meant that each type only had a single type_info object that
> is returned for all objects of that type.

That's not strictly true either, calls in shared libraries might get
distinct type_info objects, which is why you should always compare
them for equality (using operator==) not identity (i.e. by comparing
their addresses)

But they do persist until the end of the program, so your change is still OK,

Jonathan
Thread
Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Kevin Regan6 Jun
  • Re: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Warren Young6 Jun
    • RE: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Kevin Regan11 Jun
      • Re: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Jonathan Wakely11 Jun
        • RE: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Kevin Regan13 Jun
          • RE: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Kevin Regan13 Jun
          • Re: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Jonathan Wakely13 Jun
            • RE: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Kevin Regan14 Jun
              • Re: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Jonathan Wakely14 Jun
                • RE: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Kevin Regan14 Jun
                  • Re: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Jonathan Wakely15 Jun
                    • RE: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Kevin Regan15 Jun
                      • Re: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Jonathan Wakely15 Jun
              • Re: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Warren Young16 Jun
        • Re: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?Warren Young16 Jun