Re: [boost] shared_array.size()

From: Greg Colvin (gcolvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-12-12 23:46:38

Yep, and adding a size field to shared_array is extra overhead as well,
but maybe not so bad.  What I don't like is setting the size field
separately, but I'm not sure I like your shared_array2 interface either.
In particular, what about

   boost::shared_array<int> x(0);

vs.

   boost::shared_array2<int> x(0); 

From: "David Abrahams" <abrahams_at_[hidden]>
> Okay; there's one extra level of indirection in that case, though, and a bit
> more overhead, FWIW.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Greg Colvin" <gcolvin_at_[hidden]>
> 
> 
> > So use shared_ptr<vector> ?
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
>