Subject: Re: [boost] [smart_ptr] scoped_array / shared_array (size_t) constructor
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-04 12:02:50
On Friday, November 04, 2011 16:51:12 Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Richard Hadsell
>
> <hadsell_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > On 11/01/2011 12:20 PM, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> >> Adding a (size_t) constructor would produce ambiguity errors, but
> >> those are easy to fix by using the default constructor instead. Would
> >> that be acceptable?
> >
> > That sounds like a good idea.
>
> Great. Does anyone else have comments / concerns about a (size_t)
> constructor?
I still don't like the idea. If you really want to add this feature, please
retain the current interface intact. You could add a special manipulator to
make the allpcation request explicit, like this:
boost::scoped_array< int > p(boost::allocate_count(10));
Here allocate_count is a simple class that holds the size of the array to be
allocated. Alternatively, Boost.Parameter could be used, but it is quite heavy
for such basic tools like smart pointers.