Subject: Re: [boost] Why no non-null smart pointers?
From: Jeff Hill (johill_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-04-29 13:48:30
I was considering this while I was at the dentist, and I can identify a flaw
with my proposal. The "NullObjectTypes < T > :: factory ()" returns a
default constructed shared_ptr by default, and if this default version is
called from any of the constructor's that detect attempts to enter the
shared pointer into a nill internal raw pointer state, then there will be
-- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Why-no-non-null-smart-pointers-tp2642959p4661827.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