From: Joe Gottman (jgottman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-12-31 19:47:37
"Rogier van Dalen" <R.C.van.Dalen_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Hi all,
> First of all, I'm not sure this is the correct place to discuss this.
> Please point me to a better place if it's not.
> "A proposal to add general purpose smart pointers to the library"
> is based mostly on the boost shared_ptr. It explicitly allows a
> reference-linked implementation though (III.A.4). Why? According to
> Andrei Alexandrescu (Modern C++ Design 7.5) the only advantage of that
> is that no extra object (reference counter) has to be allocated. I have
> not been able to think of or find any other advantage.
> But what to do with the deleter then, whose type is not in the
> shared_ptr template parameter list? There must be something I'm missing,
> or otherwise a linked list implementation of shared_ptr is forced to
> allocate at least some free store for the deleter (or a vtable) --
> rendering the advantage void.
Try posting this to the comp.std.c++ newsgroup.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk