From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-21 17:16:51
From: "Howard Hinnant" <hinnant_at_[hidden]>
[snip things I mostly agree with]
> I find myself wondering what is the niche that scoped_ptr fills better
> than move_ptr.
Should there be one? I haven't been around when scoped_ptr was made part of
Boost but I suspect that auto_ptr's semantics were a strong motivation. If
std::auto_ptr were a move_ptr, would there be boost::scoped_ptr at all?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk