Berserker wrote:
Thanks for yours replies, I hope that you'll find the time to have a look at my test :) Peter did you remember the problem related to boost::python I'm talking about? Here is the link of your reply http://lists.boost.org/boost-users/2008/08/38864.php
I remember now. But I thought I had fixed it. In this message I say:
We've been thinking of changing the behavior of enable_shared_from_this in such cases, making it ignore subsequent shared_ptr instances to the same object and having it stick to the first one. This, however, will not happen for the upcoming 1.36 release of Boost.
You can in principle achieve the same result by patching your local copy of Boost to make weak_ptr::_internal_assign only initialize when this->expired() is true, but this has never been tested.
and, in fact, the code in the trunk and in the release branch already does this: // Note: invoked automatically by shared_ptr; do not call template<class X, class Y> void _internal_accept_owner( shared_ptr<X> const * ppx, Y * py ) const { if( weak_this_.expired() ) { weak_this_ = shared_ptr<T>( *ppx, py ); } } There is even a test for that, esft_second_ptr_test.cpp: boost::shared_ptr<X> px( new X ); { boost::shared_ptr<X> px2( px.get(), null_deleter ); BOOST_TEST( px == px2 ); } try { boost::shared_ptr< X > qx = px->shared_from_this(); BOOST_TEST( px == qx ); BOOST_TEST( !( px < qx ) && !( qx < px ) ); } catch( boost::bad_weak_ptr const& ) { BOOST_ERROR( "px->shared_from_this() failed" ); }