From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-09 11:27:57
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]>
> > Considering that shared_ptr<> implicit upcasts now actually *work*, it
> > like a good idea to make comparisons work, too. I don't see how it's
> > to break backwards compatibility, anyway. What am I missing?
> We now have
> template<typename T, typename U> inline bool operator==(shared_ptr<T>
> & a, shared_ptr<U> const & b)
> return a.get() == b.get();
> that works for different T and U, but only when the pointer comparison is
> Are you suggesting that we make operator== work for any unrelated T and U
> comparing the count? It can be done but the NULL needs to be handled
> separately fro compatibility.
I think what I'm actually suggesting is that my brain has ceased to function
and I now type random suggestions to the list like a roomful of monkeys
working on Hamlet.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk