Re: [boost] [shifted_ptr] Review Request

Subject: Re: [boost] [shifted_ptr] Review Request
From: Phil Bouchard (philippe_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-04-06 16:53:23

On 4/6/2011 1:22 PM, Thomas Klimpel wrote:
>
> If the parent is still able to do something (like incrementing a times in the child widget), then obviously references to the parent still exist. For Mark&  Sweep, you are in a context where even every implicit reference is known to the garbage collector. It's clear that you can't strictly guarantee this for a C/C++ program. But in this case, the problem would be that an implicit reference went unnoticed by the Mark&  Sweep garbage collector, not that it wiped an unreferenced node.

The timer was a bad example, forget about it.  But in the case of the 
Mark & Sweep algorithm, a call to the parent window destructor will 
still be premature if the modal child dialog box still exists.

> I have a bit the impression that you end up again talking more about another approach (Mark&  Sweep in this case) than about the "Shifted Pointer" approach. That's OK for me, just don't blame me if you should find out later that this might have been a waste of time.

By comparing Shifted Pointer to other solutions then people might find 
it easier to understand because I'm talking their language.

-Phil