Subject: Re: [boost] intrusive_ptr design question
From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-07-06 12:13:25
Zachary Turner wrote:
> Ok, so let me rephrase then: Is there a case to be made for a more
> flexible shared_ptr (either through modification or through a new
> class addition) that allows one to provide custom reference counting
> semantics much the same way that shared_ptr allows one to provide
> custom deletion semantics?
This is not unreasonable. It can't be done currently because the
sp_counted_base members that implement the reference counting are
non-virtual and inline.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk