Opened 10 years ago
Closed 6 years ago
#7003 closed Feature Requests (wontfix)
Shared ownership semantics support
| Reported by: | Domagoj Šarić | Owned by: | Ion Gaztañaga |
|---|---|---|---|
| Milestone: | Boost 1.51.0 | Component: | intrusive |
| Version: | Boost Development Trunk | Severity: | Problem |
| Keywords: | Cc: |
Description
Please add support for "resource management smart pointers" (http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_49_0/doc/html/intrusive/using_smart_pointers.html#intrusive.using_smart_pointers.smart_pointers_requirements). At least specifically for intrusive_ptr which fits nicely into the whole "intrusive" idea. Iterators should hopefully in that case simply inherit from/wrap the used smart pointer (making iteration thread safe while keeping the container lock-free).
Change History (3)
comment:1 by , 10 years ago
| Resolution: | → invalid |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → closed |
comment:2 by , 10 years ago
| Resolution: | invalid |
|---|---|
| Status: | closed → reopened |
But I did not offer a solution (merely a suggestion about iterators) - I asked that you please add this feature as I see no real obstacle for it and would find it very useful... So may refuse to do/try this and close as wontfix but IMO not as invalid...
ps. I'm currently (succesfully) using intrusive_ptr with boost::intrusive by using the circular_list algorithms class template directly...
comment:3 by , 6 years ago
| Resolution: | → wontfix |
|---|---|
| Status: | reopened → closed |
Reviewing old bugs. No other user has requested this feature so closing it as wontfix.
Your solution would work at all. Boost.Intrusive needs non-owning pointer semantics to work, so neither shared_ptr nor intrusive_ptr would work..