Re: [boost] Re: [boost] Re: [boost] Curacao: reaction to smart pointer proposal

From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-05-01 01:43:04

"Detlef Hoffner" <Detlef.Hoeffner_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:DPEAKMJIHINMMKDMMDODOEJECAAA.Detlef.Hoeffner_at_gmx.de...

[...]

> 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.
>
> Regards
>
> Detlef

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,
scoped_ptr, auto_ptr?

Gennadiy.