From: Christian Thäter (chth_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-07-13 09:03:53
> What are the complexity requirements of the boost::shared_ptr<> member
> He asks, if I understand correctly, not how boost::shared_ptr is
> _implemented_, but how it's _defined_.
> A question that will become more important if/when shared_ptr moves into
> An interesting related question is "why does shared_ptr have use_count?"
Exact, thats was my point. Does it need reset() and assign operations?
Won't a immutable shared_ref cover the semantics better? If we provide a
reset() and/or assign operation then they should not break the shared
resource as they do now so either update all copies or none.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk