5 Nov
2011
5 Nov
'11
8 a.m.
On Saturday, November 05, 2011 01:18:53 Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Andrey Semashev
<andrey.semashev@gmail.com> wrote:
I want the smart pointer to be initializable with pointers. This includes explicit NULL.
Why? What's the benefit over using the default constructor?
I want this for interface consistency which can be useful in generic code and, well, is the expected behavior. Every smart pointer tries to mimic raw pointers and the constructor ambiguity reduces this similarity. I also don't want to update my code when it breaks.