Re: [boost] [shared_ptr] auto_ptr interfaces

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-12 08:22:48

Yuval Ronen wrote:
> Hi.
> I wondered what the reason that there is a 'operator=(auto_ptr<Y>&)'
> but there isn't any 'void reset(auto_ptr<Y>&'. This seems to me as
> asymmetry.
>
> At first I thought the reason that reset(Y*) is supplied instead of
> operator=(Y*), is that Y* assignment needs to be explicit (as the
> constructor is explicit) and operator= doesn't allow explicity (is
> there
> such a word?). But if this assumtion is correct, then there is
> contradiction between the constructor for auto_ptr, which is explicit,
> and the operator= for auto_ptr, which is not explicit. Am I talking
> nonsense?

No, you make a lot of sense, and reset(auto_ptr&) indeed seems more 
consistent than operator=. But it's too late to change that now. :-)