On Oct 16, 2013 7:53 AM, "Dick Hollenbeck" <dick@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:dick@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> Looks promising, and super job on the presentation.
>
> Once you have it working, give some thought to using a special
purpose allocator for the elements of your container. A memory pool
scheme, anchored on the container, might pay dividends if it removes the
size test for element allocations. If you want the pool anchored on the
container, then overloading operator new is not best, but rather have a
container function do the allocations of its elements (from a pool it
owns.)
Invariably
this means having an "in place" new operator for the element, not a
normal new operator overload.
Such anchoring of pool in container is a separate decision from deciding
to use a fixed block allocator at all. The fixed block allocator will
be worth it regardless of where the pool lives. If you have to move
elements from one container to another, then anchoring the pool on the
container is not appropriate. But you could then have a class that held
all your containers and a pool common to those containers. I bring this
up because when instantiating hundreds of thousands of elements, memory
heap calls can be the bottleneck.
