From: Frank Mori Hess (frank.hess_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-12 13:55:45
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Saturday 12 April 2008 12:07 pm, Peter Dimov wrote:
> So you suggest we throw your improved implementation away? :-) This doesn't
> seem right to me, as it represents a fair amount of knowledge that will be
> lost. Maybe we need to move it somewhere, to
> boost/smart_ptr/esft_constructor_base.hpp, for instance? And link it from
> the docs.
Keeping it (and the enable_shared_from_this_light) as example code seems fine.
I just think people who want to do something like call shared_from_this from
constructors should be encouraged by default to use sp_accept_owner to call a
postconstructor, as it seems to be prone to fewer gotchas.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk