From: Greg Colvin (gcolvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-09-17 15:30:23
From: Andy Glew <glew_at_[hidden]>
> > Actually, the indirection didn't work, because you can't safely go from
> > Derived* to void* to Base*, so my current implementation does without
> > it. The cost is that weak_ptr is slower.
> May I take a look at your current implementation?
> Is it in Boost?
It's not ready for prime time, but I'll email you a copy when I
get home next week.
> Q: how do you get a non-intrusive implementation without
> the level of indirection? Do you use a global registry?
No. The weak_ptr still has to indirect and check the counters,
but the counted_ptr doesn't.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk