To me, intuitively (but also probably without the necessary historical context on shared_ptr design) I would think it was acceptable for us to work on, but then I wonder why is C++11's std::shared_ptr not already like this? Howard Hinnant mentioned[1] that it was mostly because no proposal was made, and apparently experimented with such a thing himself (he
Glen, On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Glen Fernandes <glen.fernandes@gmail.com> wrote: maintains libc++). I'm not on the standards committee's reflectors, but there was apparently lively discussion on shared_ptr<T[]> pointer arithmetic.
Nate, I agree that it makes sense for any construction of one from the other to be explicit. Yes -- emphasizing more than just calling an explicit constructor.
Thanks, Nate [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8947579/why-isnt-there-a-stdshared-ptrt-s...