[boost] Re: Re: Proposal for easying smart_ptr usage within C++98

From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-05-02 15:35:28

"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:009801c1f215$4d773ea0$1d00a8c0_at_pdimov2...
> [...]
> template<class T> void f(typename ptr<T>::shared p);
>
> ptr<int>::shared q;
>
> f(p); // fail

I assume you mean f(q). ;)  Is it the fact that shared is a typedef
inside ptr that confuses the compiler?  Would it be tremendously
difficult for the compiler to handle this situation in the expected
way?

> [...]
> The only suggestion I have is to encode the fat policy list in a
> single type (usually called a configuration):
>
> struct shared_config
> {
>     typedef assert_check checking_policy;
>     typedef shared_ownership ownership_policy;
> // etc
> };
> [...]

I see.  This is yet another policy bundler.  How exactly do you
go about passing the right parameters to the policies?

Dave