30 Mar
2006
30 Mar
'06
3:16 a.m.
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
On top of that there could be the friendlier: make_auto_ptr, make_shared_ptr, etc...
None of that is particularly friendly compared to new_<T>(a,b,c)... as long if we have the appropriate non-explicit converting constructor from auto_ptr rvalues in all the other smart pointers.
make_shared_ptr<T>( a, b, c ) (or however we end up calling it) still has the advantage of being able to fold the two allocations into one.
Very true; that's a good point. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com