Subject: Re: [boost] [smart_ptr] scoped_array / shared_array (size_t) constructor
From: Olaf van der Spek (ml_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-07 03:55:23
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 12:20 AM, Andrey Semashev
>> char a
>> char* p = a;
>> Is sizeof(a) == sizeof(p)? Array and pointer were synonyms, right?
> Come on. We were talking of dynamic arrays, weren't we?
That's not what you said.
You also 'conviniently' skipped the operator argument.
> I feel this is going nowhere. You clearly prefer to sacrifice interface
> clarity to less typing. Sorry, I don't share your point. Seeing other
> comments, it is clear to me that many other people are also against the
Many? I haven't seen a single one that could show real world code
that'd be affected by the ambiguity.
Haven't seen more arguments than 'let's just copy make_shared' either.
> change. If you're feeling strong about this, my suggestion is to create a
> separate component and leave the current smart pointers as they are. I'm sure
Might be a good idea.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk