From: "David B. Held" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > That is a very clean approach, and assuming it's OK to keep the > > the sole copy of p in storage_policy, even efficient. > > I'm not sure anyone would use a pointer that kept multiple copies of > p. Wouldn't that make it pretty fat?
shared_ptr keeps a copy of p in the "ownership policy" (the count structure.) Its "storage policy" (px) doesn't own the pointer. But I may be misunderstanding the context. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
