From: Daniel Frey (d.frey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-12 04:04:33
On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 03:29 +0300, Peter Dimov wrote:
> It won't if we use
> shared_ptr( detail::shared_count pn, Y* px );
> and swap(pn,pn_) as poor man's move.
I updated the patch to replace ignore_enable_shared_from_this_tag with
this approach. Which means that shared_ptr no longer contains any traces
of enable_shared_from_this[_light], only some generally useful
extensions, which is IMHO a good sign.
I also replaced the name sp_notify_observer with sp_accept_owner.
> Let me bring up something else. Should
> shared_ptr(Y* p, D d);
> call sp_accept_owner(this, p), or should it call sp_accept_owner(this, p,
> &d'), where d' is the stored deleter?
Since the pointer to the deleter could always be retrieved by
sp_accept_owner via the first parameter, the only benefit is that the
deleter's type D is passed, right? To me it seems cleaner if
sp_accept_owner should not have any direct link to the way *how* the
shared_ptr was created, just the fact that it has been created. IMHO it
should says: "This shared_pointer now owns this object" and not "This
shared_ptr now owns this object and was created with this deleter". I
simply fail to see what this should be good for, but maybe you have a
use case in mind?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk