From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-05-01 01:43:04
"Detlef Hoffner" <Detlef.Hoeffner_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Only both a) policy based smart pointers together with
> b) one standard way to define and use a default smart pointer
> for a specific type will be an acceptable solution.
> If this is achieved through typedefs and a naming conventions,
> through type traits or through a template specialization is another
> question. Important is that there is a standard way to provide a
> default smart pointer for a type.
I do not belive that there is default smart ptr for given type. For a given
type T what would you consider a default smart pointer: shared_ptr,
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk