Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [shared_ptr] Why operator< uses internal_less?
From: joaquin_at_[hidden]
Date: 2008-10-10 01:46:03

emil_at_[hidden] escribió:
> On 10/9/08, Peter Dimov <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> At the last meeting, the committee accepted Herve Broenimann's proposal
>> to change std::shared_ptr's operator< to compare get(). I don't particularly
>> like the specifics of that paper, but we'll probably need to change
>> boost::shared_ptr (and weak_ptr) to match.
> I don't see a reason to make this change in Boost. It is impossible to
> predict how many bugs it will introduce in user code, although it could
> -- perhaps too late -- highlight problems unforeseen by N2637. IMHO,
> the committee is crazy for making this kind of untested semantic changes
> in shared_ptr this late in the game.

Well, the committee is polishing the designing of the *future*
std::shared_ptr, so they
are not concerned about backwards compatibility issues. Another question
is whether
boost::shared_ptr should follow suit.

Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at