From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-23 13:45:38
From: "David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]>
> That looks like it would modify the semantics of shared_ptr, so
> you would have to ask Peter Dimov or one of the other smart_ptr
> authors/gurus about that. My guess is that the response will be
> along the lines of: "shared_ptr does not have high performance
> as a design goal, and thus such modifications are not desirable".
High performance is always a design goal, but other factors do carry some
weight, too. Were performance the only goal, we'd be using plain pointers.
And never call delete - it's too slow.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk