Andrey Semashev wrote:
Now watch this:
int my_buffer_size = 1234; auto buffer = boost::make_shared< unsigned char[] >( > my_buffer_size ); buffer[ index ] = something; int cap = buffer.capacity();
Doesn't that feel the most natural ?
I agree that the syntax is simpler but that functionality exceeds that of a pointer, IMHO.
I want to agree with you, only to make you happy, but I'm sorry, shared_ptr<T[]> does not behave like a pointer at all. It behaves like an array. Check out the available member functions. You cannot write code like this: shared_ptr<T[]> buffer; buffer-> ???? // what does this point to, I cannot figure it out ???
If you want a container, use one. Containers with shared storage would be a nice addition to Boost, IMHO, but these should not abuse shared_ptr interface.
According to what you just wrote 'shared_ptr<T[]>' has already abused 'shared_ptr<>' and all of the array features should be rolled back, or be put into another class altogether. In all seriousness, I'm not trying to be a thorn in anybody's side here. All I'm saying is that 'shared_ptr<T[]>' looks to me like it has come 99% of the way to being a full-blown object-oriented shared-buffer. I'm saying, adding the capacity will simply bring that concept closer to completion. IMHO -Sid Sacek