From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-30 07:16:39
At 07:14 PM 4/29/2002, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>... The documentation for a policy-based smart pointer could simply
>say that the recommended type for interfaces is the smart_ptr with
>all defaulted policies. This documentation is nicely supported by
>the code itself...
That appeals to me; it is a simple, understandable solution and eliminates
the need (and possible resulting confusion) for a second named smart
It has implications, however, for the choice of defaults.
I skimmed MC++D quickly, but couldn't find your rationale for choice of
defaults. I'm assuming it was something like "the safest, most commonly
needed for a wide range of general uses."
Instead, defaults would have to be chosen as "the most widely useful for
interfacing between libraries."
Now it may be that these two criteria result in the same set of
defaults. But you need to review your choice of defaults to make sure that
is the case.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk