Re: [boost] Re: Intrusive smart pointer

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-20 05:59:02

From: "David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]>
> Would it also make sense to add a shared_ptr(counted_base*)
> c'tor for geniuses who try to create a shared_ptr from a refcounted
> object directly, instead of from intrusive_ptr?

This was my original idea, but I consider the intrusive_ptr approach
slightly better. The problem with the constructor is that the 'obvious'
signatures collide with the existing constructors.