This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: std::shared_ptr vs allocators: by value or by const ref?!?
Hi,
> I don't think so. I have no idea why the shared_ptr constructors take
> allocators by value.
>
> The reset() inconsistency is probably my fault. At one point I
> experimented with passing them by reference, so maybe I missed that
> one and it got committed. I think I chose to pass by const-ref
> internally, because I couldn't see any reason not to.
>
Ok, I'll send a message to the reflector. Also, I don't see why the
requirements insist that the copy constructor of the allocator doesn't
throw: AFAICS, Table 42 is pretty clear about that. About the
destructor, the issue can be more subtle, but again I have trouble
believing that must be enforced as part of the shared_ptr
requirements... I'm under the impression that shared_ptr has simply to
be updated / tweaked consistently with the more recent allocator work...
Paolo.