> On Tuesday, July 1, 2003, at 08:21 PM, Schoenborn, Oliver wrote: > > >> On Tuesday, Jul 1, 2003, at 17:36 America/Denver, Schoenborn, Oliver > >> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Tuesday, Jul 1, 2003, at 14:38 America/Denver, Boost wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Why is there no strict-ownership smart-pointer in boost? > >>>>> Just curious to know what the reasons are. Thanks, > >>>> > >>>> What do want beyond what boost::scoped_ptr and > >>>> std::auto_ptr provide? > >>> > >>> Ability to be used in STL containers, and explicit transfer of > >>> ownership capabilities (e.g. *no* move-on-copy etc). > >> > >> So what would the copy semantics be? > > > > No copy allowed, except temporarily when inside the container to > > insert or re-order or transfer from one container to another. > > Oliver > > You may be looking for something that just doesn't exist in the > language yet: > > http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/ > n1377.htm#move_ptr%20Example
It will certainly help. In the meantime however... > I have experimented (actual working code) with what you're > looking for. But the tools are *experimental* and not ready for prime > time public use. So have I. Check out the DynObj class in the NoPtr library at noptrlib.sourceforge.net (which provides smart ref rather than smart pointer, but that`s irrelevant to the issue). > NTL ( http://www.ntllib.org/ ) claims to have this today (I think). I > haven't looked at it closely enough to give a good review, but you > might give it a go. Interesting ideas but a number of things would be a problem for many, at least at first glance (only random access, move semantics for container copy, etc). Oliver _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
