Re: [boost] intrusive_ptr / shared_ptr.

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-19 06:16:17

From: "Navi Singh" <singh_at_[hidden]>
> Peter Dimov:
>
>  I am probably talking thru my hat.  Don't know all the issues involved,
but
>  here is a suggestion.  Is the following a bad idea?  If not, is it
feasible
>  to provide a such a functionality in your smart ptr library.
>
>  Consider two classes, one derives from counted base and one doesn't.
>  class test1
>  {
>  };
>  class test2 : public boost::counted_base
>  {
>
>  };
>
>  As a rule, everyone will use a ptr template (defined later in this post).
>  The ptr template will either be a shared_ptr or an intrusive_ptr template
>  based on whether the class in consideration derives from counted_base or
>  not.
>
>  ptr<test1> t1(new test1);        // ptr is a shared_ptr.
>  ptr<test2> t2(new test2);        // ptr is an intrusive ptr.

You could do that, but why not simply restating the above as:

shared_ptr<test1> t1(new test1);
intrusive_ptr<test2> t2(new test2);

The comments are no longer necessary. :-)