Rob Stewart wrote:
From: Rene Rivera <grafik.list@redshift-software.com>
o.assign(val); o.clear();
That looks obviously not pointer like to me. And clear enough as to the meaning. But of course it brings to mind the idea that it's just a single value container, and hence possibly should have some more of those interfaces.
I suspect that adding container-like functions to the pointer interface will do more harm than good.
The pointer interface is exclusively for value access. I don't see a real problem using member functions for the other operations, like assignment and clearing. Altough I do prefer to use unique names if possible. rebind() is perfect. clear() rings better than reset() to me. -- Fernando Cacciola SciSoft http://fcacciola.50webs.com/