Re: [Boost-users] Suggestion for boost`s smart pointers

On Nov 29, 2006, at 10:33 AM, Richard Hadsell wrote:

David Klein wrote:

...

so are there any objections about adding this feature to scoped_ptr?

I'm sure I have seen this discussion before. I believe the issue was the size of scoped_ptr itself. It is supposed to be a lightweight object, no bigger than the pointer it holds. Any added overhead is unacceptable. If you can implement the feature without adding any data members, fine. Otherwise, please create a new class.

<nod> This comes up now and then. Fwiw, anyone/everyone is welcome to my emulation of the proposed C+ +0X unique_ptr: http://home.twcny.rr.com/hinnant/cpp_extensions/unique_ptr_03.html Sorry, it isn't documented. Here's the best documentation I currently have: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/ n1856.html#Addition%20-%20Class%20template%20unqiue_ptr The (non)copyright at the top means you can do whatever you want with the code, including stripping my name out of it. In a nutshell: * It has a deleter. * If the deleter is an empty class, sizeof(unique_ptr) == sizeof(T*). * It has unique ownership semantics like auto_ptr/scoped_ptr. * It does not transfer ownership with copy syntax (modulo a bug mentioned in the source code). * It has cute syntax to safely handle arrays: unique_ptr. * You can also customize the storage type (defaults to T*) by giving your deleter an optional D::pointer type. * The deleter can be a reference to a deleter. The sizeof the unique_ptr swells by a word when you do this, but it does come in handy when you want to reference some other deleter instead of copy it in to the unique_ptr. * The deleter can be a function pointer. sizeof swells here too. * It has been proposed for standardization. -Howard