Re: [boost] [boost.move] move_ptr

From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-26 19:31:07

On Aug 26, 2004, at 7:03 PM, Thorsten Ottosen wrote:

> I just wanted to hear if anybody had already made a move_ptr I could 
> use?

Fwiw, there's a copyright-free move_ptr at:

http://home.twcny.rr.com/hinnant/Utilities/move_ptr

But I don't recommend it.  I really like Dave's move implementation 
better, though it is less portable with current compilers (including 
Metrowerks).  I also think move_ptr should carry a destructor policy in 
it's type:

template<class T, class D = typename detail::default_delete<T>::type>
class move_ptr;

And I think it should be specialized on T[] for arrays:

template<class T, class D> class move_ptr<T[], D>;

And finally, I really am not happy with the name move_ptr, ironically.  
I was just this morning trying to think of a better name.

How about owned_ptr?

I was trying to contrast it with shared_ptr:  With shared_ptr, many 
instances share ownership of a pointer.  With move/owned_ptr, unique 
ownership is always assured.  Bringing up another possibility:  
unique_ptr.  I'm trying to stress the characteristic of sole ownership 
vs shared ownership, rather than the fact the pointer is movable.  In 
the future, many types will be movable (even shared_ptr).  So move_ptr 
is a really lousy name.

I spent way too much time with the thesaurus this morning. ;-)

-Howard