Subject: Re: [boost] Is there any interest in non-owning pointer-like types?
From: Oswin Krause (Oswin.Krause_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-02-01 05:24:16
> Can observer_ptr refer to no object? If not, why not just use T &? If
> so, why not just use optional<T>?
As far as i understood it, it is still assignable, unlike T&.
For me, the biggest problem of the proposal is that observer_ptr<T> is
implicitely constructed from T&. In my code I often use:
Bar b(&a);//&a signals that b only references to a, but does not copy
Now, when I write
Bar b(a); //so is a now copied?
While the interface is clearer in documentation, the usage is less
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk