Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] C++03 unique_ptr emulation
From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-03 10:42:10

On Jan 2, 2009, at 8:56 PM, David Abrahams wrote:

> on Fri Jan 02 2009, Howard Hinnant <> wrote:
>> Agreed. The thing I like about my current effort is that clients
>> see either lvalue or
>> rvalue unique_ptr's (or whatever class you're trying to move-
>> enable) and nothing
>> else. No moved-from wrappers. Downsides include the fact that
>> move(unique_ptr) is a
>> friend of unique_ptr - a tight coupling that I would rather not
>> have there. In
>> C++0X, move is a completely generic std-function, a characteristic
>> not achieved by
>> this emulation.
> Howard, do you have a test suite I can throw at this? I'd like to see
> if I can decouple that thing for you.

Although I've been running tests, I don't really yet have a neatly
packaged test suite. Part of the problem is that many of the tests
are "must fail" and I don't know of a portable/automated way to handle
that kind of test. Has boost addressed "must fail" tests?


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