Subject: Re: [boost] unique_ptr for C++03
From: Andrew Ho (helloworld922_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-12 17:29:39
Markus Mathes <markus.mathes <at> dectris.com> writes:
> Also the commented out code works for me, but I'm basically only using the
>  operator. For gcc 4.6 to compile its only missing the headers for if_
> and enable_if and some corresponding namespace issues. To me it looks the
> main issue is to get the boost::interprocess way of integration right.
I'm a bit hesitant to upgrade boost::interprocess::unique_ptr to be C++11
compliant right now because it currently doesn't handle references correctly,
and I don't know what parts of the implementation have been vetted against the
standard text. As my implementation stands right now I have vetted it against
the standard text, and there are very few limitations compiler-wise. It's also
designed to use C++11 features if available, where-as I don't see similar
features in Interprocess's or Howard's implementation.
At this point it's significantly easier for me to borrow bits and pieces from
Interprocess.unique_ptr or Howard's unique_ptr rather than start from these
implementations and work towards standard compliance. For example, I'm working
on implementing nullptr_t emulation support similar to how Interprocess does
it (using a nat*).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk