On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Jean-Philippe Barette-LaPierre < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> boost::shared_ptr should be used for pointer that different portion of the > code has the > ownership of that pointer, which rarely occur in cURLpp (I put a special > attention to that). > So, I'm not quite sure it's a good idea. Sorry, forgot to say that mostly cURLpp should use stl::auto_ptr > > > Anyway, even if it's gonna be included eventually in the standard, which I > don't think it's the > case. Adding boost as a *requirement*, instead of an optional dependency > isn't a good > idea if it's not *absolutely* necessary. I know it's now included almost in > all platforms, > but some of cURLpp users are using this library on embedded systems, for > which it's > not always true that they have boost. > > Again, I might not see the whole picture. If you can give an example where > it would be necessary, > I would reconsider using it. > > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 12:13 PM, Piotr Dobrogost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> Hi >> >> As I'm planning to change interface of curlpp to one with smart >> pointers I'd like to know your opinion on what smart pointer should >> be used? >> >> I think Boost shared_ptr would be the best as it's robust, well >> known and the last but not the least it's going to be in the Standard. >> >> Regards >> Piotr Dobrogost >> _______________________________________________ >> cURLpp mailing list >> cURLpp@rrette.com >> http://www.rrette.com/mailman/listinfo/curlpp >> > >
_______________________________________________ cURLpp mailing list cURLpp@rrette.com http://www.rrette.com/mailman/listinfo/curlpp
