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

From: Noah Roberts (roberts.noah_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-16 18:58:39

Nevin ":-]" Liber wrote:
> 2008/5/16 Noah Roberts <roberts.noah_at_[hidden] 
> <mailto:roberts.noah_at_[hidden]>>:
> 
>     I don't like this idea.  You are creating a dependency on the fact that
>     the called function will NOT keep a copy - or you are insisting that the
>     object in question implement the shared_from_this model.  If you later
>     decide that it would be prudent for the function or object in question
>     to create or pass a kept copy of this object then you'll have to change
>     the signature of the function and then each and every call to it (to
>     remove get() calls).
> 
> 
> If this were Java, I might agree.
> 
> Given your assumption, I don't see how you can pass pointers to stack 
> variables, pointers to member variables, pointers to objects in STL 
> containers, etc., to any function, because it is not possible for those 
> functions to know, let alone change, the lifetime of those objects.
> 
> Do you really allocate every single variable in your program on the heap 
> and store it in a shared_ptr, just in case?

I can't think of what your reasoning is that leads you to this 
conclusion from my statements.  Care to explain?