Well, I raised a slightly dissenting opinion to removing the typedefs, and so did strk.
Why not use a nice short name like GeomPtr to hide those ugly and hard-to-type <> ? @dbaston: there are many reasons for encapsulation. One worthy goal is to provide a simpler mental model... On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:56 AM Paul Ramsey <pram...@cleverelephant.ca> wrote: > Ah, yes, I had svn-3.5 checked out when I was running those searches. > Whooops. > > Not much objection to getting rid of the typedefs [2] that I can see. > Unless we really thing c++ is going to change the smart pointer > implementations yet again. (an open question, I suppose) > > P > > [2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geos-devel/2018-December/008750.html > > On Jan 29, 2019, at 11:53 AM, Daniel Baston <dbas...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think auto_ptr has been removed from master already, no? I'd prefer to > lose the typedefs as well, but last time we brought that up I recall there > being some disagreement. > > Dan > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 2:19 PM Paul Ramsey <pram...@cleverelephant.ca> > wrote: > >> Any reason not to renovate the code base and remote the various uses >> of auto_ptr in favour of unique_ptr and strip out the various typedefs >> at the same time so that we uniformly just use std::unique_ptr<> right >> in code where folks can see it? >> >> P. >> _______________________________________________ >> geos-devel mailing list >> geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel > > _______________________________________________ > geos-devel mailing list > geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel > > > _______________________________________________ > geos-devel mailing list > geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
_______________________________________________ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
