Re: [boost] dumb_ptr<>

From: Thomas Witt (witt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-15 11:01:34

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Noel,

Noel Yap wrote:
|
| Which means if I wanted to write a function that doesn't pass ownership,
| its ownership semantics is ambiguous:
|
|   extern C* blah();  // should pointer be free'd by caller?
|
| If, instead, I could do:
|
|   extern dumb_ptr< C > blah();
|
| the intent is clearer.

Sorry for being so dumb, but the intent isn't clear to me. What kind of
ownership semantics should dumb_ptr imply?

Thomas

- --
Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Witt
Institut fuer Verkehrswesen, Eisenbahnbau und -betrieb, Universitaet
Hannover
voice: [phone] - 4273, fax: [phone]
http://www.ive.uni-hannover.de
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE+nCze0ds/gS3XsBoRAg0bAJwMg7UUiKy/ip+bbSDup+BF/we7/ACfYKlB
/Vl+NBbQjTdQIth9YHRnQac=
=jKpO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----