Jump to content
  • Advertisement


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


scoped_ptr vs auto_ptr ... The same thing?

This topic is 5886 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I''m trying to ''get'' the use of scoped pointers and it seems to be awefully similar to an auto_ptr. Only one smart pointer can own the pointer at once. Copies transfer ownership. Is that right? Chris Brodie http:\\fourth.flipcode.com

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Original post by gimp
Copies transfer ownership.

Is that right?

Not quite - boost::scoped_ptr is noncopyable. According to the boost documentation:

"The primary reason to use scoped_ptr rather than auto_ptr is to let readers of your code know that you intend ''resource acquisition is initialization'' to be applied only for the current scope, and have no intent to transfer ownership."

You could use auto_ptr instead of scoped_ptr, but then it might look like you intend to transfer ownership at some point.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Advertisement

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!