From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-16 10:31:32
"Jonathan Wakely" <cow_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> David Abrahams wrote:
> > bad. However, we're reviewing Dave and Andrei's policy_ptr soon so it
> > might be better to use that framework for something like this.
> I think ptr_container provides a safer and more generic solution to the
> problems described in the rationale for clone_ptr.
Another issue is also the overhead imposed by such
a beast. Without move-aware containers I suspect
that vector< clone_ptr<T> > is quite slow compared to
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk