Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.std.c++ > #522

Re: Smart pointer comparison - why a difference?

Show all headers | View raw

On 2012-05-28 23:53, Bo Persson wrote:
>  In C++11, operator<  for unique_ptr [unique.ptr.special] is defined as
>
>  std::less<CT>()(x.get(), y.get())
>
>  where CT is the common_type of the unique_ptr's internal pointer typedefs.
>
>
>  On the other hand, operator<  for shared_ptr [util.smartptr.shared.cmp]
>  is defined as
>
>  std::less<V>()(a.get(), b.get())
>
>  "where V is the composite pointer type (5.9) of T* and U*."
>
>
>  What exactly is the difference, and why?

The wording difference exists, because std::unique_ptr can hold both
built-in pointers and pointer-like types while std::shared_ptr can only
hold pointers. The intention is that unique_ptr's wording has exactly
the same effect when it holds a pointer. Currently these definitions are
not the same because of a wording defect of std::common_type. An issue
has already been raised for this but is not yet visible in the official
list. In short words, that defect is because std::common_type<int*,
int*>::type evaluates to int*&&  and not int*. This was an unintended
side-effect because of change of the original definition of the
conditional operator in the presence of xvalues.

HTH&  Greetings from Bremen,

Daniel Krügler


-- 
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try posting with your ]
[ newsreader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-cpp-submit@vandevoorde.com ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html                      ]

Back to comp.std.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

Smart pointer comparison - why a difference? Bo Persson<bop@gmb.dk> - 2012-05-28 14:53 -0700
  Re: Smart pointer comparison - why a difference? Daniel Krügler<daniel.kruegler@googlemail.com> - 2012-05-29 11:25 -0700

csiph-web