Subject: Re: [boost] std::auto_ptr in public interfaces
From: Daniela Engert (dani_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-20 16:29:43
Am 20.05.2017 um 18:16 schrieb Andrey Semashev via Boost:
> On 05/20/17 18:45, Daniela Engert via Boost wrote:
>> Am 20.05.2017 um 17:28 schrieb Andrey Semashev via Boost:
>>> Personally, I would prefer libraries to switch to boost::unique_ptr and
>>> leave std::auto_ptr interfaces available (but deprecated) for backward
>> why not just going straight to std::unique_ptr?
> Because you would lose compatibility with C++03, which I presume the
> authors of the libraries want to keep.
But you are proposing to keep the auto_ptr-based interface for that
purpose, too. I don't see the benefit of two solutions for the same
problems sitting side-by-side. Users who want to stick with
std::auto_ptr just keep on using the current interface, and users who
need to get rid of std::auto_ptr in all of their code have to find a
solution for their entire code base how to deal with that. Insisting on
yet another non-standard option to interface with Boost is not
necessarily what these people have in mind, imho.
-- PGP/GPG: 2CCB 3ECB 0954 5CD3 B0DB 6AA0 BA03 56A1 2C4638C5
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk