Re: [boost] Policy-based smart pointers revisisted

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-18 13:10:27

Greg Colvin <Gregory.Colvin_at_[hidden]> writes:

> One aspect of the semantic complexity that bothers me
> is that the various flavors of smart pointer may not
> be interchangeable.  shared_ptr is partly parameterized
> on implementation, but the interface and semantics
> remain the same.  For a policy-based smart pointer
> to be usable I think you need a clear set of concepts
> that clients can use as requirements, and a clear
> delineation of which combinations of policies support
> which concepts. 

That is definitely a requirement before I can buy into this "advantage"
described in Peter's post:

     2. It allows users to globally switch to another smart pointer
        type by changing a typedef:

        typedef counted_policy default_ownership;

-- 
                       David Abrahams
   dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution