AMDG Nat Goodspeed wrote:
Steven Watanabe wrote:
Nat Goodspeed wrote:
If I have a class that supports assignment, and my class uses scoped_ptr to manage some resource...
The question is not whether swap is useful, but whether it should be part of scoped_ptr rather than another smart pointer.
Of course you're right.
But if scoped_ptr is in all other ways the best tool for the job, should my class's requirement for an assignment operator force me to change to another smart pointer instead?
Since swap already exists, it should certainly not be removed. If it didn't I could argue either way. As far as I am concerned, having to use a different smart pointer is not a problem per se as long as it doesn't introduce a performance penalty. (e.g. shared_ptr). The main issue is a keeping a consistent set of invariants. If we add all the "one little features" that anyone needs, the result will be to turn scoped_ptr into unique_ptr. In Christ, Steven Watanabe