[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       boost
Subject:    Re: [boost] [pimpl] Proposal. Determining interest.
From:       "Vladimir Batov" <batov () people ! net ! au>
Date:       2007-11-03 6:55:05
Message-ID: 002e01c81de6$7798df10$0201a8c0 () irsa ! railad ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Marc,

Just uploaded v0.6 which supports building of two separate class 
hierarchies -- separately for interfaces and for implementations as 
described in GoF Pattern Bible for the Bridge pattern.

The interface hierarchy is built as

struct Base : public pimpl<Base>::pointer_semantics {...};

struct Derived : public Base {...}

 etc.

The implementation hierarchy is still hidden and is built as

template<> struct pimpl<Base>::implementation {...};

template<> struct pimpl<Derived>::implementation : public 
pimpl<Base>::implementation {...};

etc.

Marc, let me know if that looks right for your purpose as I myself have no 
use for deep inheritance trees to test them out.

Best,
Vladimir.

> Marc,
>
> I have re-read the Bridge pattern in GoF Pattern Bible. Their example is
> just what you describe in your example. I agree that having/supporting
> two separate hierarchies is an elegant solution to a few problems. Let
> me think how pimpl<> might support that.
>
> Best,
> Vladimir.

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]