I tested a shared_ptr<void> and while it seems to be invalidating the memory of the pointer (implying that it is deleted), the proper destructor is never called.
"Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 000701c2a066$b1a8e720$1d00a8c0@pdimov2">news:000701c2a066$b1a8e720$1d00a8c0@pdimov2... > From: "Johan Nilsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > > Incidentally, shared_ptr<void> may allow you the kind of type erasure > > > you want. Just a thought... > > > > I' afraid I don't really follow you. Wouldn't shared_ptr<void> choke on > > trying to delete through a void pointer? > > No. > > shared_ptr<void> pv(new X); > pv.reset(); // calls X::~X() > > _______________________________________________ > Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost > _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
