From: Hartmut Kaiser (hartmutkaiser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-13 05:43:56
Joel de Guzman wrote:
> Another solution that I seem to like would be to simply revert to
> v1.3 behavior while still using smart pointers. Then, an auxilliary
> class rule_holder<RuleT> can be used to hold rules for storage
> in containers. The rule_holder manages the lifetime of the held
> rule. You can get, set or reset the held rule.
Is it really only a matter of inclsion of rule<>'s into some container?
I'm not completly sure. If yes, your 2nd suggestion is the better one,
because it's less intrusive and because it don't add features to the
rule<>'s template, which aren't used very often. But if there are other
situations, where copy sematics are required, the first suggestion may
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk