Re: [Boost-users] Safe to pass dereferenced anonymous shared_ptr?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Safe to pass dereferenced anonymous shared_ptr?
From: Krzysztof Czainski (1czajnik_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-11-06 05:48:43

2013/11/6 Scott Mueller <smueller_at_[hidden]>

> I have just one comment. I would recommend returning a unique_ptr instead
> of a shared_ptr, as you can then use the object as a unique_ptr, be move it
> into a shared_ptr, or adopt it by other means elsewhere in your data
> structures. Returning a shared_ptr locks you into keeping the data as a
> shared_ptr.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> M. Scott Mueller
>

If you're in C++11, why would you use a pointer at all and not return a
string? It's movable.

If you're not in C++11, then consider returning by value anyway. RVO will
most likely avoid the copy anyway. That said, (I wish unique_ptr emulation
was in boost) I get it why use shared_ptr even though you don't share
anything...

Regards,
Kris