Home Projects Jobs Clientele Contact


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Container <-> protocol dependancy

Well, I would definitely go for no-RTTI solution. After
all, this is C++. Programmer should Know What They Are Doing (TM)
Now, do boost::any and friends work without RTTI?
Do we still use any of that in API?

Krzysztof Rzymkowski wrote:

>>Now, last issue with your
>>HttpServletRequest::service(ServletRequest&, ServletResponse&).
>>It uses dynamic_cast, which in turn means we'll have to use RTTI for
>>whole servlet container, and all servlets. Not something I'm too happy
>>about. If we could get around it somehow (while preserving this specific
>>type check preferably), it would be nice.
>We can always repleace the dynamic_cast with static_cast
>If you want to have the type check and not use RTTI, you'll have to write
>the code that RTTI would have generated by hand. This wouldn't rather give
>better results. Of course when one is implementing ones own RTTI one can
>choose which classes are under the custom RTTI.
>All in all I'm for fully dropping RTTI (and not implementing similar
>mechanism) or fully using it (like it is now) with dynamic_casts, typeid

Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
Total Knowledge. CTO

Authoright © Total Knowledge: 2001-2008