From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	FREEMAIL_REPLY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,927ae253da8bb547
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-31 13:21:22 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!news.cesnet.cz!crax.cesnet.cz!news.felk.cvut.cz!not-for-mail
From: "Sergey Koshcheyev" <serko84@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Specialization
Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 22:04:02 +0200
Organization: Czech Technical University
Message-ID: <ad8kvi$12g0$1@ns.felk.cvut.cz>
References: <ad56du$pp4$1@wanadoo.fr>
 <4519e058.0205300909.5bfb317d@posting.google.com> <ad5nem$fhb$1@wanadoo.fr>
 <uznyha1d3.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov> <ad5vj4$euo$1@wanadoo.fr>
 <3CF6CF7D.8000704@worldnet.att.net> <ad72e5$e9c$1@ns.felk.cvut.cz>
 <82347202.0205310608.2f7d634d@posting.google.com>
 <ad8ah7$uq3$1@ns.felk.cvut.cz> <3CF7B571.2090901@mail.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: m232.dkm.cz
X-Trace: ns.felk.cvut.cz 1022875445 35328 62.24.78.232 (31 May 2002 20:04:05
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ns.felk.cvut.cz
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 20:04:05 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:25118
Date: 2002-05-31T22:04:02+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Hyman Rosen" <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote in message
news:3CF7B571.2090901@mail.com...
> This is called "placement new", and is a fully blessed
> part of standard C++. There is no justification for
> calling it a "hack". There is nothing unreasonable in
> separating reservation of memory from construction of
> objects, and indeed, that is what "ordinary" new does
> as well.

Yes, of course, that's why I put quotes around "hack". It was meant as
"not-really-a-hack". As for ordinary new, it does return you a pointer to a
fully initialized object, doesn't it?

Anyway, describing anything as hack, quotes or not, is quite subjective, so
I'm not going to defend my point of view any further.

Sergey.