Re: [boost] Proposal to add smart_ptr to the boost library

From: David Maisonave (dmaisonave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-30 16:12:50

"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:<02e501c625d4$0804e1f0$6507a8c0_at_pdimov2>...
> David Maisonave wrote:
> 
> > On my test, reference-link is over 25% faster than reference-count 
> > logic for initialization.
> 
> This only matters if the only thing you do is initialize. This is 
> best-case
> scenario for reference-linked for both performance and memory use. How
often 
> is that the case in real code?
> 
> Then there are thread safety, custom deleters, weak_ptr support,
> enable_shared_from_this, and competition from intrusive_ptr on the low
end, 
> which should be even faster in ST mode. 
> 

One of the main points of doing reference logic, is to increase
performance during initialization.
So this is a key test when testing reference logic performance.

The test showed a big difference in initialization and in copying
containers of smart pointers.

There was very little difference when iterating through the container,
but a big difference when copying the container of smart pointers.

The smart_ptr supports thread safety, custom deleters, and
intrusive_ptr.

I'm not sure how important weak_ptr's are, and I have not seen a good
case for their requirement.
I'm open minded, and I would like to see someone put a good argument for
their required usage.

What is ST mode?
And what exactly is enable_shared_from_this?