[boost] Re: Proposal: Efficient Pointers

From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-16 01:11:11

> because they tend to be close to reserved names.  I'm no expert on smart
> pointers, but it seems that std::auto_ptr could easily have taken this
> route.  My question is: why did it not?

See here
http://www.awprofessional.com/content/images/020163371X/autoptrupdate/auto_p
tr_update.html

and here

http://gotw.ca/gotw/025.htm

>
> Dave

Gennadiy.