[boost] Re: smarter auto_ptr

From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-18 11:25:15

"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:budege$oco$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
> "Bronek Kozicki" <brok_at_[hidden]> wrote in message:

>    I think you also need more motivation for the introduction of
> deleters. You should show how they would be used in realistic
> situations and why they would be more convenient or safer than other
> well-known alternatives (e.g. shared_ptr, vector, an auto_array
> template or a special pupose class which does cleanup in its
> destructor). Saying you want to make auto_ptr more compatible with
> shared_ptr does not seem sufficient, since the deleters don't have
the
> same form as those used with shared_ptr, and you can't use your
> auto_ptrs with incomplete types, which is one of the key features of
> shared_ptr.
>

I should say these are not necssarily criticism of your proposal; I'd
just like to see some examples and discussion.

Jonathan