[boost] Re: [smart_ptr] const-correctness as function argument

From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-02 14:55:20

"Rozental, Gennadiy" <gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:1373D6342FA1D4119A5100E029437F6401169E4E_at_clifford.devo.ilx.com...
> > The correct solution, of course, is the following:
> >
> > void g(shared_ptr<foo const> p)
> > {
> >     p->bar();
> >     p->baz(3); // Error!
> > }
> [...]
> So I do not see any reason to blame ptr<T>.

I don't "blame" ptr<T> for anything.  And note that I agreed with you
implicitly before you even wrote your reply. ;)  I merely gave reasons
for considering an alternative that I see was discussed at length on
c.l.c.m.  Perhaps my constT<> suggestion will be more palatable
to some.

Dave