--- Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl@getdesigned.at> wrote:
I know it works on a large number of platforms (several versions of EDG, VC, g++). valgrind also didn't have any complaints. Is the approach also OK from a theoretical viewpoint?
I don't know about STLport's approach, but const-casting the parameter is definitely not OK from a theoretical viewpoint.
OK, but my question was more: is my approach backed up by the ISO standard, or does it work just by chance?
Your const parameter is a promise that you won't modify the parameter, but then you go ahead and do it anyway. You should make the parameter non-const, like the GNU C++ library does with auto_ptr: auto_ptr(auto_ptr& __a) throw() : _M_ptr(__a.release()) { }
The problem is that my code doesn't compile (g++ 3.4.2) if I remove the "const". I've tried adding the throw() but that didn't do it. I see there is also an auto_ptr_ref<> in the g++ library, but I don't know if this is what does the trick. Could one of the C++ gurus please explain? BTW: Assuming that I can get my auto_array to work without the const, in the copy constructor and assignment operator, what is the difference between const auto_array<T> and scoped_array<T> ? Apart from the release() it looks almost the same. Ralf __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com