On Sat, 2008-04-26 at 15:45 +0300, Peter Dimov wrote:
Daniel Frey:
I refactored enable_shared_from_this in order to remove the _owner flag.
To test it, you need a small and straight-forward addition to detail::weak_count: It needs .empty(), similar to detail::shared_count.
Are you sure that you need to test for emptiness instead of expiration?
I'm not sure, because I don't know what is expected. I initially used .use_count() != 0, but it triggered a problem in esft_constructor_test.cpp, line 131. I already asked Frank for more information/documentation about what (the new) esft should support, but he said that there is no documentation, instead he pointed me to the regression tests, so I figured I need to make them pass. With .empty(), they do. When looking at the test case that fails with .use_count() != 0, I don't really see why the call to shared_from_this() in line 130 should throw. Shouldn't the call alone be legal? The only illegal thing I could spot in this test case is, that after calling x.shared_from_this() no other shared_ptr takes ownership of x. Regards, Daniel PS: I already committed the fix for the new shared_ptr's ctors. What about adding the corresponding reset()? The refactored esft could use it to simplify one line. And what's your opinion on documenting the new interface? (You've seen the documentation thread?)