From: Phil Bouchard (philippe_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-11 06:09:48
"Daryle Walker" <darylew_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:BAY115-DAV9D530B17A66EBC82F5C17BF770_at_phx.gbl...
[...]
>> template <typename T>
>> class shifted_allocator
>> {
>> public:
>> typedef shifted<T> value_type;
>> typedef shifted_ptr<T> pointer;
>> typedef const shifted_ptr<T> const_pointer;
>> ...
>> };
>>
>> - value_type: being the real concrete type expected by the smart pointer
>> - pointer: defines the node pointer used internaly by the container
> [TRUNCATE]
>
> Isn't "const_pointer" supposed to be an analogue of "T const *"? Right
> now, you have it represent "T * const", which definitely isn't the same
> thing!
Yes, sorry about that and thanks for the notice. It should be:
typedef shifted_ptr<const T> const_pointer;
-Phil