Re: [boost] Re: Proposed smart_handle library

From: Gregory Colvin (gregory.colvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-22 09:48:49

On Tuesday, Jul 22, 2003, at 05:56 America/Denver, David Abrahams wrote:

> Gregory Colvin <gregory.colvin_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> I'm generally less afraid of automatic conversions than many others,
>> and dropped them from auto_ptr, and later from shared_ptr, only under
>> duress.  I like them for wrapper classes because they make it possible
>> to drop the wrappers directly into existing code that uses the wrapped
>> types.  I like the terseness too, but then I am perverse enough to
>> prefer &*p to p.get().
>
> Some conversions are worse than others.  For example, an implicit
> conversion from a raw pointer to an owning handle/smart-pointer is
> far more dangerous than the opposite conversion.

Agreed.  It is the latter conversions I like.