From: Gregory Dai (gregory.dai_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-03 17:41:14
On 11/3/07, Emil Dotchevski <emil_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > I don't think making file_entry is a lot of work. It's pretty simple and
> > straightforward. And once it's made, you keep it around in your arsenal.
> Not to split hairs here, but you could also write:
> boost::shared_ptr<FILE> open_file( char const * name, char const * mode )
> if( FILE * f = fopen(name,mode) )
> return boost::shared_ptr<FILE>(f,fclose);
> throw fopen_error(name,mode);
> and keep that in your "arsenal".
> In fact, I think this function would be a good addition to boost so
> it's part of everyone's arsenal. :)
This free function looks pretty good, indeed. But again, file_sentry works
with not only shared_ptr, but auto_ptr or other *_ptr's as well. In reality
auto_ptr is lighter and has more applications than shared_ptr. That is,
there are in general more applications of auto_ptr<file_sentry> than of
shared_ptr<file_sentry>. Now we are talking about templatizing this function
and what not.
In another dimension, we have other C pointer types similar to FILE*. This
is harder to templatize than the type of *_ptr, due to differences in
functions such as fopen()/fclose(). In such cases, it seems ideal to have
separate thin wrappers to encapsulate the differences.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk