[boost] Re: No more tree_traits<> dependencies under placed_ptr<>

From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-03 14:15:40

"Larry Evans" <jcampbell3_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:3D9C8EEF.4050609_at_prodigy.net...
> [...]
> Based on the lack of response to my other postings about collecting
> cycles, I have my doubts whether boost would be interested in yet
> another smart pointer.  I could be wrong.

Well, Boost has been interested in cycles for a long time, as is evidenced
by Greg Colvin's cyclic_ptr, which has been in the files area for as long as
I can remember.  Probably the main factor is that cycles in shared_ptr<>
are currently handled by weak_ptr<>, and so that method has a lot of
momentum.  But if you can show another method of dealing with cycles
is compelling and advantageous, through the use of benchmarks and
use cases, then I don't see why they shouldn't be taken into consideration.

Dave