Hi Thibault,
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Thibault Genessay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I really don't know why it is this way - I had actually never noticed
> that ref_ptr<> had this "feature". It makes more sense to me how the
> observer_ptr<> is implemented because ref_ptr and observer_ptr are
> just proxies that should IMHO behave like ordinary references or
> pointers when we call operator*() or operator->(). (I'm sure a C++
> guru could slap me for what I've said, but I'd enjoy it if it came
> with an explanation :)
Which version of the OSG are you using? In 2.4 the observer_ptr<> is
consistent with
ref_ptr<> i.e.
inline T& operator*() const { return *_ptr; }
inline T* operator->() const { return _ptr; }
inline T* get() const { return _ptr; }
The next question is this wacky world is why does ref_ptr<> and
observer_ptr<> do this trick?
Try:
typedef std::set< osg::ref_ptr<Node> > MySet;
Then try to access members of it, and you'll find out they are in fact
now a const ref_ptr<> and you
can't access any non const methods of Node. What the const method
here is const of the ref_ptr<>
not const of what its pointing to. If you meant this then you'd have
osg::ref_ptr<const Node>.
However, it all can get a bit sticky, as sometimes you intend const
osg::ref_ptr<Node> to be const osg::ref_ptr<const Node> in which case
the relaxation of the the above accessors misses this.
Robert.
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
