🚀 go-pugleaf

Bill Gibbons <bgibbons@taligent.com> wrote:
>
>   * The raw pointer must *always* be owned by some auto_ptr.
>
>   * The raw pointer must *never* be owned by more than one auto_ptr.
>.....
>Taligent has had years of experience using a variety of templates which
>are variants of auto_ptr.  The consensus here is that auto_ptr must have
>ownership semantics, and they must be enforced by the assignment operator
>and copy constructor.

The requirements for exception-safe programs are very important, and I
agree that auto_ptr should have ownership semantics.  However, it does
not follow that these semantics should be implemented with the assignment
operator and the copy-constructor.

Because of the confusion, op= and the copy-ctor should be unimplemented
(private) and the transfer of ownership implemented with some other
function.  (This is also one of the Swedish Committee Draft Ballot
comments.)

Dag Bruck

-- 
Dynasim AB                            Phone:  +46 46 182500
Research Park Ideon                   Fax:    +46 46 129879
S-223 70 Lund                         E-mail: Dag@Dynasim.se
Sweden                                URL:    http://www.dynasim.se


[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]