Re: [boost] Curiousity question

Subject: Re: [boost] Curiousity question
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-13 05:43:54

On 10/13/16 12:14, Andrey Semashev wrote:
> On 10/13/16 01:58, Edward Diener wrote:
>> I would like to ask a design question for any Boost developers or anyone
>> on this mailing list who might care to answer.
>>
>> You are designing or working on a library, perhaps for Boost, perhaps
>> for fun, and part of the design of the library has some public
>> functionality taking a shared pointer as input. You:
>>
>> 1) Use boost::shared_ptr
>> 2) Use std::shared_ptr
>> 3) Use both boost::shared_ptr and std::shared_ptr with the same
>> functionality
>> 4) Use neither, you roll your own shared pointer-like functionality
>> 5) You don't lke shared pointers and use raw pointers instead
>>
>> I really am curious about this. I haven't put any limitation on your
>> library or made any presumption on who your library is for, on purpose.
>> Thanks for anyone answering !
>
> Depends on the target. If I can rely on C++11 features being available
> in the project then I use std::shared_ptr. Otherwise I use
> boost::shared_ptr. Both times unconditionally, i.e. no auto-detection
> stuff.

I should also say that I find myself often using boost::intrusive_ptr 
instead of either std::shared_ptr or boost::shared_ptr but I'm not sure 
that's the answer you're looking for.