Arbitrary sized Variant

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

dsimcha wrote:
> I've started looking at implementing arbitrary sized Variant, and
> I've hit a point where I need some opinions.  The idea of
> arbitrary sized Variant is to heap allocate when things get too
> big to be stored inline in the VariantN struct.  However, how
> should copying a VariantN struct with the contents stored on the
> heap be handled?
> 
> If I don't copy the underlying heap space (thus giving reference
> semantics), then the semantics of Variant depend in a non-
> intuitive way on the size of the item stored in it.  This is
> obviously bad.
> 
> If I do copy the data, this results in a ridiculous number of
> hidden heap allocations.  This is obviously bad.
> 
> I guess the available options would be to make a completely
> separate Variant type for arbitrary size (annoying, not as
> transparent as anyone would like), or to try to implement some
> kind of copy-on-write semantics (would require much deeper/more
> fundamental changes to the existing code).

I suggest you go with copying. There won't be many heap allocations 
because you only allocate the struct once to keep it inside Variant, and 
you copy it on the stack out whenever someone asks for it.

If someone wants to use reference semantics, they'll use Variant with a 
pointer.


Andrei