Emil Dotchevski wrote:

...

2. shared_ptr<> may be replaced by intrusive_ptr<> or home made equivalent. This (a) reduces dependency on other Boost part (shared_ptr does depend on quite few other libs) and (b) the atomic locking used by shared_ptr would be eliminated. This would help a little bit on multiprocessor systems - lock may be hundredths of cycles and during the time access to the memory bus is disabled. (a) is a valid concern, OTOH shared_ptr is such a low level component of Boost that -- as careful as I am in avoiding physical coupling -- I don't consider it a real dependency; rather, it's a tool for avoiding dependencies.

Any reason for not using intrusive_ptr? Shared_ptr may be a low level part of Boost, but I'm not sure it should be lower level than this library. A library like this is overdue in my opinion. Brian Wood Ebenezer Enterprises www.webebenezer.net