Re: [boost] smart_ptr changes

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-10-22 08:49:54

At 02:00 PM 10/19/01 +0300, Peter Dimov wrote:
 >From: "Darin Adler" <darin_at_[hidden]>
 >>     j) reset() on a unique shared_ptr now allocates memory due to 
simpler
 >> swap idiom implementation
 >
 >I believe that boost implementations have several goals:
 >
 >* Provide a (standard-ready) library specification for the LWG;
 >* Provide a reference implementation of the above;
 >* Advocate good design and coding practices;
 >* Provide a library that is useable in real world conditions.

Yes, exactly.

 >Therefore I think that in this particular case we should omit the
 >optimization, keeping the reference implementation clear, readable, and
 >'obviously' correct.

I strongly agree.

--Beman