From: Douglas Gregor (gregod_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-15 08:54:45
On Tuesday 15 April 2003 08:30 am, Noel Yap wrote:
> This has probably been asked many times, but here it goes: Why doesn't
> boost have a dumb_ptr<> to replace the "left-over" use of free pointers
> (eg no ownership semantics, copyable, ...)?
I don't know why it isn't in Boost (perhaps it hasn't been asked many times?),
but I too would like such a class. I would call it just ptr<>, not
dumb_ptr<>, if only political reasons :)
Doug