|
Boost Users : |
From: David Klein (d.klein_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-03-20 08:28:56
boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden] wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Klein [mailto:d.klein_at_[hidden]]
>> Sent: 20 March 2006 10:27
>> To: boost-users_at_[hidden]
>> Subject: Re: [Boost-users] enable_shared_from_this - or an
>> alternative..
>>>
[snip]
>
> Thanks Dave, that does cover the problem well.
>
> However, I cannot use the null deleter mechanism suggested as the
> shared_ptr is passed on to monitor and is used there. The second
> scheme, using a factory fucntion, would seem to be approriate,
> however, how to I handle creation when the CSource1 class is actually
> to be used as a base class? If the factory function is in CSource1,
> it doesnt know about any derived classes. I don't want to have to
> write factory functions in every dervied class - that seems a waste.
> Is there a correct technique for getting around this issue? I am
> assuming a template of some description, but now sure what that
> entails.
>
>
>
>
> James
>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
is the following snipped what you have in mind?
struct base {};
struct derived1 : public base {};
struct derived2 : public derived1 {};
typedef boost::shared_ptr<base> base_ptr;
struct monitor
{
void
add( const base_ptr & _ptr)
{
// ...
}
};
struct factory
{
factory( monitor & _monitor ) :
monitor_(_monitor)
{
}
template<typename T>
boost::shared_ptr<T>
create( void )
{
boost::shared_ptr<T> tmp(new T);
monitor_.add(tmp);
return tmp;
}
private:
monitor & monitor_;
};
void
foo( void )
{
monitor m;
factory f(m);
f.create<derived1>();
f.create<derived2>();
}
-- dave
Boost-users list run by williamkempf at hotmail.com, kalb at libertysoft.com, bjorn.karlsson at readsoft.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, wekempf at cox.net