The exception safety problem described above may also be eliminated by using
+ the make_shared
+ or allocate_shared
+ factory functions defined in boost/make_shared.hpp. These factory functions also provide
+ an efficiency benefit by consolidating allocations.
namespace boost {
Index: libs/smart_ptr/smart_ptr.htm
===================================================================
--- libs/smart_ptr/smart_ptr.htm (revision 45553)
+++ libs/smart_ptr/smart_ptr.htm (working copy)
@@ -22,7 +22,8 @@
keep track of dynamically allocated objects shared by multiple owners.
Conceptually, smart pointers are seen as owning the object pointed to, and thus
responsible for deletion of the object when it is no longer needed.
- The smart pointer library provides five smart pointer class templates:
+ The smart pointer library provides six smart pointer class templates, plus
+ efficient factory functions for shared_ptr:
@@ -38,7 +39,7 @@
shared_ptr
<boost/shared_ptr.hpp>
- Object ownership shared among multiple pointers
+ Object ownership shared among multiple pointers.
shared_array
@@ -61,6 +62,17 @@
They are examples of the "resource acquisition is initialization" idiom
described in Bjarne Stroustrup's "The C++ Programming Language", 3rd edition,
Section 14.4, Resource Management.
+ Additionally, the smart pointer library provides efficient factory functions
+ for creating shared_ptr objects:
+
+
+
+ make_shared and allocate_shared
+ <boost/make_shared.hpp>
+ Efficient creation of shared_ptr objects.
+
+
+
A test program, smart_ptr_test.cpp, is
provided to verify correct operation.
A page on compatibility with older versions of
@@ -130,7 +142,7 @@
number of suggestions resulting in numerous improvements.
October 1998. Beman Dawes proposed reviving the original semantics under the
names safe_ptr and counted_ptr, meeting of Per Andersson, Matt
- Austern, Greg Colvin, Sean Corfield, Pete Becker, Nico Josuttis, Dietmar Kühl,
+ Austern, Greg Colvin, Sean Corfield, Pete Becker, Nico Josuttis, Dietmar Kühl,
Nathan Myers, Chichiang Wan and Judy Ward. During the discussion, the four new
class names were finalized, it was decided that there was no need to exactly
follow the std::auto_ptr interface, and various function signatures and
@@ -156,7 +168,7 @@
as to run various timings of the direct and indirect approaches, and found that
at least on Intel Pentium chips there was very little measurable difference.
Kevlin Henney provided a paper he wrote on "Counted Body Techniques." Dietmar
- Kühl suggested an elegant partial template specialization technique to allow
+ Kühl suggested an elegant partial template specialization technique to allow
users to choose which implementation they preferred, and that was also
experimented with.
But Greg Colvin and Jerry Schwarz argued that "parameterization will discourage