Re: About rcgc_shared_ptr

From: ÒÝÁØ Ñî (yyl_20050115_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-07-31 20:09:59

A downgrade implementation can be like this
(which is actually my former implementation during the experiments)

We define an interface:

struct IDIsposable
{
  virtual void Dispose() = 0;
};
And implement this interface with class A

class A : public IDisposable
{
Public;
  A():disposed(false){}

public:
  virtual void Dispose(){
     if(!this->disposed){
        this->_pb.Dispose();//this Dispose belongs to rcgc_shared_ptr
        this->_pc.Dispose(); //this Dispose belongs to rcgc_shared_ptr
        this->disposed = true;
    }
  }
 bool disposed;
  rcgc_shared_ptr<B> _pb;
  rcgc_shared_ptr<C> _pc;

};

And we don¡¯t care about ~A() and let the rcgc_shared_ptr call Dispose method of the IDisposable.
This would avoid the dtors definition.

However, this is not as elegant as the previous given solution in C++,
having to write more code which we don¡¯t like to do,
although no difference in other languages or platforms.


I¡¯m sorry that I have to call it a day now and have to get some sleep (4:06am here)
Waiting for your kindly response and suggestions.

Best Regards,
Yilin