From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-29 02:29:49
Beman Dawes wrote:
> * In a quick (no discussion of exact meaning of terms) straw poll, the
> was 9 1/2 yes, 0 no, to the question of whether or not a policy-based
> pointer should support arrays. (The 1/2 vote was from someone undecided.)
Here I see serious question to what extent smart_ptr should support arrays:
1. Should smart_ptr support operator
It would not be difficult to present such operator in array-storage-policy,
but how do we deal with ambiguity with operator tester*?
2. Is there anything else we need to "support" arrays?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk