On 9/28/2010 12:43 PM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote: > >> I probably would never personally use shared_ptr because in my mind it >> is slightly beyond what an average C++ programmer uses on a day to day >> basis, and it obscures the clear notion of "object ownership". >> >> I have never (I am old, this is a long long time, and countless lines of >> code) been in a position where I could not assign object ownership >> clearly to one container over another. If ever this became obscure, I >> would probably backup and take another look. >> >> Object ownership is something to keep one's eye on. >> >> >> Dick >> > > > This was an opinion I expressed about shared_ptr, which hopes to relieve > me of having to think clearly about object ownership. I have no problem > thinking about object ownership, so I have this opinion about > shared_ptr. IMO, shared_ptr is a solution without a sufficiently large > problem. Managing object ownership is not a significantly difficult > design responsibility, and has always been part of C/C++ programming. > > > I don't feel the same way about auto_ptr, which is *one* reasonable way > to deal with heap allocated objects in the face of exceptions. If no > exceptions can occur, auto_ptr is not useful. If exceptions, then this > is a sufficiently large problem to justify auto_ptr, but it is not the > only solution. auto_ptr is one reasonable and simple solution. Another > one that can also work is to simply stash the pointer soon after heap > instantiation into the object's eventual owner, and then the problem > gets moved to the owner. When the owner's destructor gets called, it > deletes the newly instantiated owned object. Either solution is better > than simply leaving the pointer on the heap and not copying it to the > owner and not using auto_ptr, and then experiencing a thrown exception > in that function that leaves the object exposed to a memory leak. > > > Just wanted to clarify: > > auto_ptr: good sometimes, > if you cannot copy pointer to the eventual owner soon enough, > > shared_ptr: not worth the cost.
Dick, I have already changed my code to not use shared_ptr. It isn't quite as clean, but it is close. I just have a bit more validation to do before I commit the changes. This also means that I will not be changing the included boost headers. Wayne > > > Probably few care about my opinion anyway. There's never a shortage of > opinions, in my opinion. > > > Dick > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
