Schoenborn, Oliver wrote: >> 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).
[...] If you wish to easily use a simple ownership ptr and do not worry bypassing some "mutable usage rules", you could always try the good old non standard mutable_ptr<>: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/ptr/mutable_ptr.hpp [...] Some algorithms may not work portably at run-time but simple ones will, this will depend on your project needs. But it is always possible to convert the list< mutable_ptr<X> > -> list<X *> before doing so. ** Use at your own risk ** ;) Philippe A. Bouchard _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
