Re: [boost] Re: smart_ptr vs smart_resource

From: Greg Colvin (Gregory.Colvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-21 16:12:06

Agreed.  But if smart_resource is intended as a contribution
to Boost I don't see a big problem.

At 01:48 PM 2/21/2003, Michel André wrote:
>Is shared_count scheduled to come out from the detail namespace and be
>publically available and maybe a bit documented?
>
>I don't think we should encourage users to use things from detail namespace?
>
>/Michel
>
>Phil Nash wrote:
>> Peter suggested I use shared_count when I first started talking about
>> smart_resource (or shared_resource as I was then calling it) over a
>> year
>> ago - so it's not a new thing :-)
>>
>> [)o
>> IhIL..
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost