• Matthew (10/14) Dec 02 2006 This is not going to be a simple change. That's not to say I'm averse to...
• Adi Shavit (4/20) Dec 05 2006 This is related to the set() question.

"Matthew" <matthew hat.stlsoft.dot.org> writes:

 2. In the spirit of RAII, maybe throw an exception (or report some
 error) if the interface_ptr<> is initialized with NULL/0. This will save
 a lot of error checking, and make the code clearer. Or maybe make an
 alternate type that does this, or a policy...

This is not going to be a simple change. That's not to say I'm averse to the
possibilities of having a policy-based version, but you can see from the
definition of stlsoft::ref_ptr - there are two template parameters up to
1.9.1b30; it now has three (for reasons to be discussed later) - that this
would not be easily achieved.

Ironically, it would have been in interface_ptr. ;-)

Can you give me a couple of examples of where this would be necessary? There
may be some other way to address the problem.

Cheers

Matthew

Adi Shavit <adish gentech.co.il> writes:

This is related to the set() question.
Please see my sample code for an example, where it might have been helpful.
Adi

Matthew wrote:
 2. In the spirit of RAII, maybe throw an exception (or report some
 error) if the interface_ptr<> is initialized with NULL/0. This will save
 a lot of error checking, and make the code clearer. Or maybe make an
 alternate type that does this, or a policy...
     

 This is not going to be a simple change. That's not to say I'm averse to the
 possibilities of having a policy-based version, but you can see from the
 definition of stlsoft::ref_ptr - there are two template parameters up to
 1.9.1b30; it now has three (for reasons to be discussed later) - that this
 would not be easily achieved.

 Ironically, it would have been in interface_ptr. ;-)

 Can you give me a couple of examples of where this would be necessary? There
 may be some other way to address the problem.

 Cheers

 Matthew