On Thursday, April 3, 2003, at 05:04 AM, Peter Dimov wrote:
So if someone has an opinion about this potential change to
scoped_ptr, now
is probably the right time to express it.
I've been experimenting with:
template
class move_ptr;
So far I like it. It is implemented so that the deallocator c
I think scoped_ptr needs to remain as it is. If we need this
functionality a new scoped_deallocator may be the way to go.
On Thursday, Apr 3, 2003, at 11:04 Europe/London, Peter Dimov wrote:
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
We find ourselves in want of a custom deallocator for scoped_ptr, but
no such t
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> We find ourselves in want of a custom deallocator for scoped_ptr, but
> no such thing seems to exist now.
>
> Has this been thought of?
>
> If yes, what was the reason for not supporting this?
If you want a shared_ptr-style runtime custom deallocator support, this is
n
We find ourselves in want of a custom deallocator for scoped_ptr, but
no such thing seems to exist now.
Has this been thought of?
If yes, what was the reason for not supporting this?
--
Lgb
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.
