Re: [boost] BCB5, the pimpl idiom bug and the new Unit Test Framework

From: Ross Smith (r-smith_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-12-21 17:47:14

Peter Dimov wrote:
> 
> From: "Fernando Cacciola" <fcacciola_at_[hidden]>
> > On second thought, this conclusion leads me back to my original proposal:
> > use the technique of grin_ptr<> with
> > scoped_ptr<>.
> >
> > It doesn't make sense to change scoped_ptr<> though,
> 
> [...]
> 
> On second thought, this actually makes sense to me. Scoped_ptr requirements
> will change slightly, in that it will require a complete type only when its
> constructor is instantiated.
> 
> sizeof(scoped_ptr) will increase, but since scoped_ptr is noncopyable, this
> will not have much impact (it's not meant to be put in containers.)

As some of us keep pointing out :-) it wouldn't be necessary to make a
global choice between the two strategies if you use a policy-based
pointer.

-- 
Ross Smith ...................................... Auckland, New Zealand
r-smith_at_[hidden] ......................... http://storm.net.nz/~ross/
  "We need a new cosmology. New gods. New sacraments. Another drink."
                                                       -- Patti Smith