Re: [boost] [intrusive] rtti_base class proposition

Subject: Re: [boost] [intrusive] rtti_base class proposition
From: Stefan Strasser (strasser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-10-20 11:18:00

Am Tuesday 20 October 2009 19:47:38 schrieb Ireneusz Szpilewski:
>  > Why is a common, standardized or de facto standard name needed?  The
>
> usual case is to create a base class for each context in which a common
> base is desired.

there are various solutions for this in C++ and boost.
when you migrate from another language a common object base class might seem 
necessary, but I don't know of a case that can't be handled by void *, 
boost::any, boost::variant...

> (By the way std::shared_ptr<rti_base*> would give us
> C++ equivalent of IUnknown interface with metods:
> QueryInterface();
> AddRef();
> Release();
> )

boost::intrusive_ptr