This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Proposing switch -fsmart-pointers


On 10/06/2012 11:59 AM, _ wrote:
> Not that I think that STL/Boost are not great solutions for many
> problems out there.
> But the fact is that there is and always will be c/c++ code that can't
> and will not use it.

But surely the set of people refusing to use C++ smart pointers is the
same set that will refuse to use your -fsmart-pointers.

> C or C like templateless C++ code is still domain of most  os /
> drivers source code out there.
> Just go agead and try to ask Linus to wrap all pointers to stl
> templates ;D

And he'd have the same response to -fsmart-pointers.  Face it, the
only real differences a compiler builtin would bring are:

1.  A fossilized "smart pointer type".
2.  A different declaration syntax.

Andrew.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]