Subject: Re: [boost] Why no non-null smart pointers?
From: Jeff Hill (johill_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-04-29 11:06:34
> static ChessPieceNull chessPieceNull;
> static shared_ptr < ChessPiece > nullsp( &chessPieceNull, nullDeleter
> () );
> return nullsp;
Thanks for your suggestion. Agree this is usually preferable, but since the
code is in the specialization (within a user snap-in) then of course the
user can decide which approach he prefers.
-- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Why-no-non-null-smart-pointers-tp2642959p4661821.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk