🚀 go-pugleaf

This message was somehow lost in the process of  transfer, so I submit it again:

I find it hard to understand the reason behind template class auto_ptr's (April draft) "strict ownership semantics." Its copy-constructor and assignment operator call __release__ on the source, and thus "effectiviely transfer control" of the pointed object. 
I am dissapointed. I expected auto_ptr or a simmilar variety to feature __deep-copy-semantics__. Of-course, this variiety is more restrictive - it requires the template paramter to have copy-constructor, assignment operator and destructor. The obvious use for deep_copy_auto_ptr is to simplify the maintainance of containers of pointers to objects. The STL makes life hard when you embed, in a class, a member that is a template instantiation of a container on pointer type. You must write you own ccotr, assignment operator and destructor for the enclosing class, to ensure the deep-copy semantics. You are excempt from it, when you embed a container that stores objects by value. Writing one's own deep_copy_auto_ptr template solves the problem. I am surprised to find that this simple facility is not part of the language! (Or I may be wrong in my whole endestanding of STL usage).

	Avner Ben | avnerben@netvision.net.il



[ 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. ]