Re: [boost] Re: shifted_ptr: why?

From: E. Gladyshev (egladysh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-03 17:48:31

--- Andrei Alexandrescu <andrewalex_at_[hidden]> wrote:
if development continues in some non-Boost context.
> 
> Would be great. Maybe now (with a couple more pointers inside Boost or
> knocking at its gates), there's enough interest for smart_ptr, interest
> focused on streamlining smart_ptr instead of discussing whether smart_ptr is
> "evil" or good. So far, there have been some great, I'd say, crucial,
> contributions to smart_ptr from inside Boost, plus many that made smart_ptr
> better in the same way that punches taken make a boxer stronger :o).

I agree. It is hard to use the current 
boost::smart_ptr in policy based libraries.
The boost::smart_ptr interfaces should 
be simply defined as specializations of
a general smart pointer.  If it is what you
mean by streamlining.

Eugene

as speci

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com