Subject: Re: [boost] RFC: A better shared_array
From: Rhys Ulerich (rhys.ulerich_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-10-19 14:00:43
>>>> The current shared_array doesn't keep track of size. This greatly
>>>> decreases it's usefulness. So I wrote a variant that does:
>>>> http://pastebin.com/wkdLVqM1
> If one thinks of the class as a resource-owning iterator_range, I
> think a three member (shared_ptr/iterator_range) implementation gives
> more flexibility (e.g. sub range instances could track resource
> ownership against the same shared_ptr).
I extended the spirit of Olaf's shared_array2 implementation quite a
bit so that it really is a smart resource-managing iterator_range
called shared_range. The implementation (with documentation) and
tests are up at https://github.com/RhysU/shared_range. I've opted to
move resource allocating operation's like Olaf's shared_array2(size_t)
constructor into free functions in the spirit of make_shared and
allocate_shared.
Olaf, I've added your name to the implementation header in
shared_range.hpp. Please let me know if that's not okay with you.
Any feedback (or edge cases I've missed) greatly appreciated,
Rhys