From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-19 12:34:39
<DKl_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> > To me, a policy-based pointer is clearly the way to go.
> I have been using 'boost::shared_ptr<T>' which serves well as an
> interface. I wouldn't consider using a policy-based smart pointer to
> define interfaces in projects: people would choose different policies
> causing incompatibilities.
You are talking about this like this is runtime parameters. You choose
Policies efined smart_ptr<your policies> class and using it. You may or may
not support introperability with other policies.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk