Re: Smart_ptr docs (was Re: [boost] scoped_ptr vs auto_ptr)

From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-04-09 09:02:43

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Brey" <brey_at_[hidden]>

> Losing this equivalency is a shame, although I do like being able to
> point to incomplete types and its subsequent reduction in header
> dependency.  If only there were a way to get the best of both worlds.
> :-(  As a side opinion, I definitely don't think it would be worth
> giving up the equivalency just to detect programmer-shorted-to-ground
> errors that most compilers warn about anyway.

If you usually enable the warning, I think you're not losing anything in
terms of header dependency reduction. Do you commonly and consciously write
auto_ptr<X> where X has a trivial destructor?

-Dave