customizing boost::pool/boost::object_pool via template parameter for ordered/non-ordered usage

[rad_d@…]

1. A documentation conflict between declaration and definition of boost::pool::purge_memory(). The definition documentation is

//! pool must be ordered

, but the declaration documentation does not provide this information.

2. Version of non-ordered boost::pool::release_memory()

Thereby there is the question - are there any differences in implementation or perfomance of ordered/non-ordered versions of this function?

3. Providing ordered/non-ordered release_memory() and purge_memory() for boost::object_pool

4. Efficient(non-ordered) construct/destroy of single objects in boost::object_pool(i.e. when boost::object_pool will be used for allocating single objects only, not arrays of objects)

5. Introduce some template parameter in the boost::object_pool(and in the boost::pool) in order to customize the pool for ordered/non-ordered or both usage.

[edupuis]

1. Method boost::pool::purge_memory() does not require the pool to be ordered. Documentation has to be amended.

2. Current implementation of boost::pool::release_memory() fails if the pool is not ordered. It could be implemented by adding a pool.order() function which could be called by the user to make an unordered pool ordered. The pool.order() function could also be called automatically if the pool maintains a boolean describing whether it is ordered or not.

3. We could provide a gateway to release_memory() and to purge_memory(), the latter calling destructors of objects allocated, exactly what is already implemented in the destructor of object_pool.

4. This is related to ticket #3789. In the current implementation, boost::object_pool can not be used to allocate arrays of objects.

5. If ticket #3789 is resolved, this is probably not as needed. However, it could let a user choose between a slow 'object_pool::free()' or a slow 'object_pool::~object_pool()' as described in ticket #3789, although I fail to see relevant usages where one would choose a slow free. The suggested template parameter seems useless for boost::pool as the caller chooses between the ordered or unordered malloc/free functions.

Any comments ?

[anonymous]

So, I agree with you. The behaviour as described in your comment in ticket ​#3789 is what I expected.

[edupuis]

(In [78454]) Added methods release_memory() and purge_memory() to object_pool. This complete and fixes #6610, as the remaining part of this ticket was addressed by #3789.

[edupuis]

​https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/pool at revision 79460 contains a solution for tickets #3789, #5902, #6561, #6610, #6701, #6718, #6865 and #6867. Related test cases are also present.

​https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/pool at revision 79460 does not contain any other new features or modifications other than those related to the above tickets.

Boost.Pool currently has no maintainer and is thus orphaned.