Subject: Re: [boost] Rationale for shared_ptr/array including both ptr to control and ptr to data in class
From: Olaf van der Spek (ml_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-09-27 06:57:25
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:26 AM, Nathan Ridge <zeratul976_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> > From: Olaf van der Spek
>> > Not having size() and others like begin, end, etc, is a serious
>> > drawback IMO.
>>
>> Then why not simply use either shared_ptr<array<T, N>> or
>> shared_ptr<vector<T>>?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Robert
>
> shared_ptr<array<T, N>> limits you to cases where you know
> the size of the array at compile time
>
> shared_ptr<vector<T>> results in two dynamic allocations: one
> for the vector object itself, and one for its internal array
It'll also initialize the elements (not wanted) and it provides
another interface.
Olaf