Michael Schneider wrote:
Is there a reason why shred_ptr does not accept an allocator?
shared_ptr doesn't have an allocator template parameter because this would encode an implementation detail into its type. An important design principle of shared_ptr<T> is to hide such specific requirements behind an opaque type that just "does the right thing" when it comes to deallocation/destruction. This doesn't mean that shared_ptr shouldn't accept an allocator, though. The proper way to add allocator support would be via an additional constructor: template<class Y, class D, class A> shared_ptr( Y * p, D d, A a ); and a corresponding reset. Now in CVS. ;-)
- If a change is required, what can I do to help make this change in boost (I am new to the boost community)?
You can contribute a test for the new functionality. :-)