Re: [Boost-users] shared_ptr<> null deleter

From: Kevin Martin (kev82_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-16 13:41:42

On 16 May 2008, at 16:49, Noah Roberts wrote:

> You can do a lot more than that!  Consider the case of a handle of  
> some
> sort that you need to return to a service when you are done.  Case in
> point, in order to get rid of an sqlite database connection pointer  
> you
> call db_close(), NOT delete.
>
> No big deal, just use db_close as your deleter!

Is encapsulating the sqlite pointer in an object and having the  
destructor do that not a better alternative?

Other than the time and effort required to develop an encapsulating  
class I can't think of an example where it is better to do this.  
Except for stack/static objects. I'm pretty new to C++ though.

Thanks,
Kevin Martin