On 8/30/2010 12:22 AM, Paul Rubin wrote:
I guess that is how the so-called smart pointers in the Boost C++
template library work. I haven't used them so I don't have personal
experience with how convenient or reliable they are, or what kinds of
constraints they imposed on programming style. I've always felt a bit
suspicious of them though, and I seem to remember Alex Martelli (I hope
he shows up here again someday) advising against using them.
"Smart pointers" in C++ have never quite worked right. They
almost work. But there always seems to be something that needs
access to a raw C pointer, which breaks the abstraction.
The mold keeps creeping through the wallpaper.
Also, since they are a bolt-on at the macro level in C++,
reference count updates aren't optimized and hoisted out of
loops. (They aren't in CPython either, but there have been reference
counted systems that optimize out most reference count updates.)
John Nagle
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
