From: Ed Brey (brey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-17 15:43:09
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:018501c22dac$ff373c30$1d00a8c0_at_pdimov2...
> > I understand. And the constness of intrusive_ptr_add_ref ultimately
> relies on the constness of the count object, when there is one. If there
> are valid reasons to have the const object be either const or non-const, I
> suppose the choice sould be passed up to the user.
> The choice _is_ left to the user. :-)
Yes, technically it is, but not in a convenient fashion, since he would need to create his own mutable counted_base. Hence your smile, I presume. I think that <T const> support is quite important, and so counted_base should have its count mutable (with associated changes to free functions), or there should be two counted_base-style classes provided. What's your plan for gathering enough information to make a decision on how to proceed?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk