List:MySQL++« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Warren Young Date:June 15 2009 4:10pm
Subject:Re: Why dynamic allocation for Option objects?
View as plain text  
Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> std::string
> DBDriver::set_option(std::auto_ptr<Option> o);
> 
> The existing function could then be changed to simply forward to that
> one, and ideally deprecated.

Perhaps.  I'll keep it in mind, but I don't much mind the current 
formulation.  Maybe next time I'm in that area of the code it will 
rankle me, too.
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