From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-28 14:26:39
Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
> This is about how I expect it to work. But from this description it's
> 1. Why would you need to save counter into archive? After all value 10
> has nothing to do with resulting 5.
> 2. Why would you need direct access to shared_ptr counter? After all
> using regular shared_ptr copy would automatically bump it to proper value.
I remember my initial implementation just restored the original state.
Thinking better of it I made a change to the current system. Now that you
mention it, it wouldn't seem to need the counter anymore. Just for laughs I
commented out the serialization of the counter and if failed to build the
test. I'll have to look into it.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk