From: Dietmar Kuehl (dietmar_kuehl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-19 23:09:56
David B. Held wrote:
> So, if I understand you correctly, are you saying that you think
> Loki::SmartPtr might be a good addition to boost, but as an
> implementation detail of a more rigid smart pointer interface,
> rather than exposing all the policies directly?
No. A policy-base smart pointer is OK and a suitable template on its own
(I can't say whether Loki's smart pointer is the right thing but it
possibly is). However, together with the introduction of a policy-based
smart pointer a template taking one argument shall also be introduced
and advertised as *the* smart pointer to be used in interfaces. This
latter template is probably implemented in terms of the policy-based
smart pointer although this is not a required.
-- <mailto:dietmar_kuehl_at_[hidden]> <http://www.dietmar-kuehl.de/> Phaidros eaSE - Easy Software Engineering: <http://www.phaidros.com/>
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk