On 3/31/2015 4:03 PM, Simon Richter wrote: > Hi, > > On 31.03.2015 13:29, Brian Sidebotham wrote: > >> delete m_model; > >> should really be: > >> delete m_model; >> m_model = NULL; > >> Other functions (namely read_DEF) make assignment from m_model. It's >> too complicated to try and rely on knowing the logical order of >> functions in a file format parser to guarantee that it won't break. At >> least if the assignment from m_model assigns NULL, debugging is >> reasonably sane. > > I'd rather like to see a smart pointer instead. > > If my object deletes another object, this implies that it has a rough > idea of the ownership semantics, but these are never explicitly spelled > out. auto_ptr/unique_ptr could then be used to denote exclusive > ownership, shared_ptr for shared ownership, or intrusive_ptr for > reference counted objects with internal counters. Naked pointers could > then mean "no ownership". > > Simon
This is my preference as well. Although I would veto unique_ptr for now. I'm not ready to make kicad c++ 0x11 compliant yet. > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
