On Friday, February 15, 2013 16:53:36 Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 13:14:21 -0500, Dan <dbdavid...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > When you say things like "Andrei was considering phasing out > > postblits..." I get nervous. Can we please have some comments from > > Andrei/Walter about what the plans are? I'm not asking for the ultimate > > solution - just to know the general direction and where this issue > > stands at present. Is there anything any of us can do to help move this > > forward? > > I think the plan was to *assume* postblits were inexpensive, not to > disallow them.
Yes, but as I recall, in discussions on const and postblit, Andrei made a comment about how postblit hadn't really worked out and we need copy constructors (in which case, we'd move to normally using copy constructors as the norm). But I don't believe that Andrei suggested getting rid of postblit completely (due to the code breakage it would cause if nothing else), and while I think that Walter and Andrei would deal with the postblit issue very differently if they were to start over, there are no plans at present to get rid of it. - Jonathan M Davis