Re: [boost] shared_ptr: unsafe, or am I crazy?

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-17 11:18:43

At 09:59 AM 1/17/2002, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 >> A smart shared_ptr can do the right thing on b.reset(), but on
 >b.release()
 >> the user will be left with a Base* and the undefined behavior is not 
far
 >> away.
 >
 >I agree that release() is dangerous. It is also required if you want to 
use
 >smart pointers with any COM (and, I suspect, CORBA) projects. The typical
 >scenario (shown by Rob), is when you need to return a pointer in an out
 >parameter. In that case you need to tell your smart pointer you want to
 >take ownership of the pointee away from the smart pointer.

Is this related to a specific policy instance?  Can release() only be 
exposed in that particular policy instance?  Thus shared_ptr and 
scoped_ptr, for example, wouldn't have release(), but an Ownership policy 
related to COM objects would expose release().

--Beman