From: Greg Colvin (Gregory.Colvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-21 17:42:39
At 04:16 PM 9/21/2002, you wrote:
>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?
Our scoped_ptr started out to be what auto_ptr was supposed
to be, but isn't -- move_ptr wasn't on the radar at all.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk