🚀 go-pugleaf

Fergus Henderson (fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU) wrote:
: Yep.  With the current spec., you need to write

: 	auto_ptr<double> p(f().release());

: and

: 	p.reset(f().release());

: instead.

This has been mentioned earlier, of course.  So I'd like to repost
this recent uncountered reply:

Eric Biederman (ebiederm@cse.unl.edu) wrote:
: There is a case where it doesn't work.
: 
: The problem is that you are passing it as a standard pointer type.
: What happens if you were to run out of stack after the call to release
: and before the call to the constructor, or reset.  And an exception is
: thrown.
: 
: If your program actualy catches that exception then a memory leak has
: occured. ( A rare case I will admit).
: 
: There are probably more realistic examples is less mundane code.

Maybe when an object containing many auto_ptr's is returned, in which
case the auto_ptr's must be moved jointly?

: It must be in an object at all times TO BE SAFE!

Any remarks, please?


Stein Somers (somers@intec.rug.ac.be)
INTEC - IMEC/University of Gent, Belgium
---
[ 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. ]