Re: [boost] Technical Excellence?

Am 31.03.2024 um 21:17 schrieb Vinnie Falco via Boost:

On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 11:04 AM Ivan Matek via Boost wrote:

...

My guess would be that >80% of users of boost SmartPtr are just annoyed that 13 y after C++11 they have mix of Boost and std in their codebase. Because in real codebases often people do not bother to upgrade old code, they just start using new stuff so you end up with mix of boost and std.

Right, this mixture causes avoidable costs on various metrics.

That is probably true, but removing Boost.SmartPtr does nothing to solve it. If the maintainers of a code base are bothered by a mixture of smart pointer types, they must refactor the code base in question to use only one type instead. boost::shared_ptr and std::shared_ptr are almost identical, so an automated search and replace would likely suffice.

And possibly fall into a trap related to operators: *only* the (in)equality operators have the same behaviour as their std:: counterpart, the other relational operators are either missing in boost::shared_ptr (by design!) but exist for std::shared_ptr, and have different behaviour. While both boost:: and std:: flavoured shared_ptrs are designed to be used as keys in associative containers, they order differently and have a different definition of equivalence. Other Boost libraries (like e.g. Signals2) depend on that. AFAIK, this isn't brought to attention anywhere (but what do I know). Thanks, Dani -- PGP/GPG: 2CCB 3ECB 0954 5CD3 B0DB 6AA0 BA03 56A1 2C4638C5