Simon Richter-2 wrote:
That would be very similar to a ptr_* container that assumes ownership of the object, with a common base class for all the objects to facilitate destruction.
Glad to get some response :) Requiring a common base class/interface is a huge demand. This would couple client code a lot for the sake of such a small utility and it wouldn't be directly compatible with already existing classes. The proposed "heap" has very different semantics compared to a container. Once you put something in the heap you never want to access it again. All you want to achieve is delayed and synchronized destruction. You can achieve similar functionality using a std::vector<boost::any> in which you insert boost::shared_ptrs. The syntax is a lot worse though and more importantly, more difficult to understand. Compare: std::vector<boost::any> keep_alive; // Always use named smart ptrs boost::shared_ptr<boost::signals::scoped_connection> connection(new boost::signals::scoped_connection(signal, slot)); keep_alive.push_back(connection); boost::heap keep_alive; keep_alive.put(new boost::signals::scoped_connection(signal, slot)); In the latter case we clearly signal something - we're not interested in the connection variable, only it's lifetime. Johan -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/RFC---lifetime-management-tf4425074.html#a12663742 Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.