Re: none

[David Philippi]

On Friday 07 June 2002 17:54, Ingo Ruhnke wrote:
> It never was in boost, it was a self written thing from me, I just
> placed it there, since that was the place where all the other pointers
> where. The purbos of this class was to add a additional == 0 check on
> dereference.

Why? There is one - it's called signal 11. ;-)
Dereferencing a 0 pointer will yield a segfault with a core dump. If you then 
just use "gdb pingus core", a simple "up" will show you where the segfault 
occured and in case of a 0 pointer it will be very easy to recognise what's 
the reason. 

> I prefer the 'Sprite*' style, 'cause the above looks like a
> multiplication to me.

I can live with that, it's just that I tend to oversee the * if it's placed 
direct behind the type and I've never though of multiplication when seeing 
such a declaration. Normally they are at a place where a multiplications 
isn't even allowed and there will usually be nothing to assign a result to 
on the left. ;-)

BTW is there hope of reducing the numbers of shared_ptr<T> ? I'd guess that 
those are one of the main reasons for the long compilation times since 
templates are awfully slow to compile and boost uses quite every feature of 
templates.

Bye David