
12 Apr
2008
12 Apr
'08
2:43 p.m.
On Friday 11 April 2008 18:10, Peter Dimov wrote:
I agree that providing the ability to build this lightweight helper may be valuable to some. But I'm not sure that we should provide several esft classes in Boost (except possibly as examples). This of course raises the question of which esft base (of the three candidates we have) should be provided.
I'd say go with the 1.35-like implementation. I think using sp_accept_owner is preferable to shared_from_this in constructors, due to the exception concerns I posted about earlier: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/173097 and I view reducing the functionality of esft in order to reduce the memory footprint by 1 pointer too extreme for the general case. -- Frank