Created on 2007-10-10.00:00:00 last changed 172 months ago
Proposed resolution:
Change the synopsis in [util.smartptr.shared]:
void swap(shared_ptr&& r); ... template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>& a, shared_ptr<T>& b); template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>&& a, shared_ptr<T>& b); template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>& a, shared_ptr<T>&& b);
Change [util.smartptr.shared.mod]:
void swap(shared_ptr&& r);
Change [util.smartptr.shared.spec]:
template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>& a, shared_ptr<T>& b); template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>&& a, shared_ptr<T>& b); template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>& a, shared_ptr<T>&& b);
[ Bellevue: ]
Concern that the three signatures for swap is needlessly complicated, but this issue merely brings shared_ptr into equal complexity with the rest of the library. Will open a new issue for concern about triplicate signatures.
Adopt issue as written.
When the LWG looked at 674 in Kona the following note was made:
We may need to open an issue to deal with the question of whether shared_ptr needs an rvalue swap.
This issue was opened in response to that note.
I believe allowing rvalue shared_ptrs to swap is both appropriate, and consistent with how other library components are currently specified.
History | |||
---|---|---|---|
Date | User | Action | Args |
2010-10-21 18:28:33 | admin | set | messages: + msg3632 |
2010-10-21 18:28:33 | admin | set | messages: + msg3631 |
2007-10-10 00:00:00 | admin | create |