Don't avoid pointers out of fear; if you're purposely avoiding them then maybe C++ isn't for you, you might be better off using another language. You can make some pretty intense gfx games with C# (if you're writing for the Windows eco-system.) As already stated there are a number of rules-of-thumb, some tried and true patterns, and some really great new support in C++0x that make pointer management pretty easy.

Another thing you can do; when I was starting out with C I sat own with my compiler (and GCC or CLang is really nice for this, you can just install cywin and the gcc toolchain if you're not willing to stray from windows) and worked through some example pointer patterns until I got a fairly deep understanding of how they work. It didn't take long either.

If you want to be a proficient programmer with graphics you should invest the time it takes to be comfortable with pointers. Either that or just write tic-tac-toe games with other languages. Smart phone developers seem to do pretty well.

Since programming in C and later moving to C++ professionally for 15 years (university and learning by myself before that), and understanding all the nuances of pointers, even I on rare occasions forget to delete/free() some pointer. And that always causes some problem, often hard to track down ones.

Using smart pointers can remove that small bug that all humans are prone to create.So, it isn't about being "afraid" of pointers, it's just common sense.

Heck, I'm a really good driver, why would I need an air bag in my car? I don't ever make a mistake while driving....

The real proper use of these are all based on _lifetimes_. Who is responsible for creating the object? Who is responsible for destroying? Are users of the object just borrowing it for a while or do they need to take over responsibility of the lifetime? If they're just borrowing the object, how long do they need to borrow it for?

I honestly find given proper design thinking about ownerships and lifetimes beats smart pointers at large.

EXACTLYYYYY finally one man on earth understands programming. damn. why is it so hard to make people forget about those damned rule of 3/5 ?

EXACTLYYYYY finally one man on earth understands programming. damn. why is it so hard to make people forget about those damned rule of 3/5 ?

Not knowing the rule of 3/5 is like not knowing for loops. You have a giant gaping hole in your knowledge just waiting to come along and bite you on the ass.

There are a great many situations where the "rule of zero" will not work conveniently without you implementing the appropriate containers or proxies (which need to obey the rule of 3/5, by the way) in order to have your "rule of zero." Two examples where you need non-trivial handling of objects where the standard library is lacking convenient containers: handle duplication and COM with proper reference handling, unlike most DirectX code.

This, plus the rule of zero depends on your compiler being able to automatically generate appropriate default equivalents for move ctor/assignment operator. That isn't available everywhere just yet (although the situation seems to be improving). Many people will be using older compilers, so you can't blindly forget about the rule of 3/5.