-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 17 April 2008 01:42 am, Daniel Frey wrote:
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 17:16 -0400, Frank Mori Hess wrote:
Daniel Frey: template< typename U > shared_ptr<U> shared_from_this( U* u );
template< typename U > shared_ptr<U const> shared_from_this( U const* u );
Wouldn't it be safer to make it a non-template? The aliasing constructor can be easily misused. If the user really wants to use the aliasing constructor, they could always pass the return value from shared_from_this() to the aliasing constructor.
In which case it is useless, as it cannot accept "this" and therefore doesn't solve any problem at all. Passing this allows you to pass the type of "this", which is the derived type T, not the type of enable_shared_from_this<T>.
No, what I was trying to convey is you have the T type inside enabled_shared_from_this<T>. To be clear: template<typename T> enable_shared_from_this { shared_ptr<T> shared_from_this(T *t); //... }; Whether you remove the template parameter from the shared_from_this method, or or follow Peter's suggestion and remove it from enable_shared_from_this class, it seems like you have one more template than you need. Also, there is no reason not to add a simple helper free function: template<typename T> shared_ptr<T> shared_from_this(T *t) { return t->shared_from_this(t); } which would provide some convenience and a sanity check for the common case usage. - -- Frank -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIB09q5vihyNWuA4URAsk4AJ9XMFrEZCYA/y/6ujGQM0SxoJTmIwCdErKS DjD2nFRshjUQl/3HRjwLEVA= =dSld -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----