Phil Nash wrote: > The fact is that most (I would hope) of those that are subscribed to the > list know what a smart pointer is. Many would also make the extra connection > between smart POINTERs and general RESOURCE management.
Not sure even here we agree 100%. What is the precise scope of the term smart pointer? Does it encompass iterators, for instance, which model another aspect of pointers totally unrelated to resource management? AFAICT the link between pointers and resource management is simple an old implementation detail, the pointer was the easiest tool in the box for allocating variable resources at run-time, but there is nothing forcing this link, or even strong support for it in the language (or the whole smart pointer topic would never arise and there would be no issue with delete[]) It concerns me to name and model the behaviour of a future library on the implementation detail with shortcomings that needs replaced. Final disorganised point <g> When you think 'pointer' without a context, what concept do you associate first? Resource-manager? Or dereferencable? The very name suggests the latter to me! [Which could be why I have such a hard time with pointers-that-don't-point] -- AlisdairM _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
