[boost] Re: Re: Smart pointers: One more implementation +question

From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-05 13:53:19

"Dave Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:063401c2cd44$28ece840$7901a8c0_at_penguin...
> On Wednesday, February 05, 2003 1:00 PM [GMT+1=CET],
> David B. Held <dheld_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> > > [...]
> > > Type generators are overkill, since unlike with iterator adaptors
> > > there's no need to preserve type identity.  Normal inheritance will
> > > work just fine.
> >
> > That's a good point.  Do you think public inheritance is ok, or
> > should private be used?
>
> If you think about it briefly, you'll see that private inheritance would
> defeat the whole purpose ;-)

Do you mean because you would have to replicate the entire smart_ptr
interface?  Ah.  Then there would be no point to calling it smart_ptr.
You would just create a custom smart_ptr each time.  Yes, I guess that
would defeat the whole purpose.

Dave