From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-17 15:32:13
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Gregor" <gregod_at_[hidden]>
> On Thursday 17 January 2002 02:02 pm, you wrote:
> > In regards to other comments on release(), in an ideal world it would
> > not be necessary, but the real world contains other languages besides
> > C++, and legacy APIs that are not optional. Providing some control
> > over whether release() is exposed will only mean that the class can
> > conditionally be made useless.
> There appears to be a lot of animosity aimed at release(). Am I correct in
> assuming that many here would prefer the removal of release() even from
I'm not a release() hater, however I can appreciate that someone supplying
smart pointers as a way of protecting inexperienced programmers from
themselves would want a configuration that didn't include release().
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk