On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 3:21 AM Edward Catmur via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:

On Tue, 3 Jan 2023, 07:38 Frederick Virchanza Gotham via Std-Proposals, <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:

On Monday, January 2, 2023, Edward Catmur <ecatmur@googlemail.com> wrote:

You could accomplish the inplace part with an appropriate allocator. 

If the allocator fails to allocate because the buffer is too small, then this problem can be detected at runtime and we can throw an exception. But with the classes I wrote, we can catch this at compile time either with 'static_assert' or a concept constraint.

Allocators are typed. Such an allocator just needs to refuse to rebind to a T that is too large or too aligned.

Sadly, "use a different allocator" does not suffice to give you the in-place allocation strategy. This is because "an allocator is a handle to a heap." You need some way for the allocator (which is a value type, and will be copied around quite a bit inside the internals of the STL) to point to the place-where-the-memory-should-come-from (which in this case is "inside this specific polymorphic_value object, and not inside that one (unless of course the polymorphic_value object is copied or moved, in which case we do mean that one)."  The allocator model is not designed to work with allocators that are, themselves, heaps (and thus not value types).

Strongly recommend watching my talk linked above, even though it is 90 minutes.

It's quite possible to write an inplace_any, inplace_function, inplace_unique_function, and so on, but you can't do it by just abusing the allocator model; that physically will not work — neither in theory, nor in practice on any mainstream implementation.

–Arthur