From: Schoenborn, Oliver (Oliver.Schoenborn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-01 23:06:21
> On Tuesday, July 1, 2003, at 08:21 PM, Schoenborn, Oliver wrote:
>
> >> On Tuesday, Jul 1, 2003, at 17:36 America/Denver, Schoenborn, Oliver
> >> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tuesday, Jul 1, 2003, at 14:38 America/Denver, Boost wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Why is there no strict-ownership smart-pointer in boost?
> >>>>> Just curious to know what the reasons are. Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>> What do want beyond what boost::scoped_ptr and
> >>>> std::auto_ptr provide?
> >>>
> >>> Ability to be used in STL containers, and explicit transfer of
> >>> ownership capabilities (e.g. *no* move-on-copy etc).
> >>
> >> So what would the copy semantics be?
> >
> > No copy allowed, except temporarily when inside the container to
> > insert or re-order or transfer from one container to another.
> > Oliver
>
> You may be looking for something that just doesn't exist in the
> language yet:
>
> http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/
> n1377.htm#move_ptr%20Example
It will certainly help. In the meantime however...
> I have experimented (actual working code) with what you're
> looking for. But the tools are *experimental* and not ready for prime
> time public use.
So have I. Check out the DynObj class in the NoPtr library at
noptrlib.sourceforge.net (which provides smart ref rather than smart
pointer, but that`s irrelevant to the issue).
> NTL ( http://www.ntllib.org/ ) claims to have this today (I think). I
> haven't looked at it closely enough to give a good review, but you
> might give it a go.
Interesting ideas but a number of things would be a problem for many, at
least at first glance (only random access, move semantics for container
copy, etc).
Oliver