|
Boost : |
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
Hi,
> 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:
Foo a;
Bar b(&a);//&a signals that b only references to a, but does not copy
it.
Now, when I write
Bar b(a); //so is a now copied?
While the interface is clearer in documentation, the usage is less
clear!
Best,
Oswin
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk