220 28934 article Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Bo Persson Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Is World's Dumbest Pointer still on the table?!? Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:16:26 +0200 Lines: 52 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <8a6731f7-1c9b-482d-817e-c2374fc9ae1b@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1476793044 17574 195.159.176.226 (18 Oct 2016 12:17:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 12:17:24 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCZ6RLW3UIKBBQNFTDAAKGQEYD6IH7Y@isocpp.org Tue Oct 18 14:17:20 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-lf0-f72.google.com ([209.85.215.72]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bwTKK-0002HF-Bz for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:17:04 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-lf0-f72.google.com with SMTP id b75sf9825721lfg.3 for ; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 05:17:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isocpp-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=to:from:subject:date:lines:message-id:references:mime-version :user-agent:in-reply-to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=Lp4HFLWPTcZuEiuUwsS/J1Yi0SylPgUn2r8kjhnZOMI=; b=GCsn4GwzIrSA6f/cBMlLZXWOOe22Qrv9wQj4q/z9VkJoNd14GVw3teCSV51gkIYDwm bURpTmG5i6aQgffVnRgtrBJSSpqS2LiXl5b5Q/e5C1kAwaVmqPFnx0/NUr+t7IrEwKNp pSCv7w8YhXVemoBbMl0+61v5idgQG7Nag0UVoka7nBKwco1g/SEJWpibR9A14tbMRnaq UthZ3+TSOT8yI74tnyp+J1vltawN3Qt7ovTjnpgjRxJOWoRh4XCTzkD4/mFEdN9m4SV5 NRDE8N5LaYDuP3n3MqLwVgGHAPKsOspNV0t+7wcZV64ANIzeaE3A2TEzth46QbwOkOoq gQLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:date:lines:message-id:references :mime-version:user-agent:in-reply-to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=Lp4HFLWPTcZuEiuUwsS/J1Yi0SylPgUn2r8kjhnZOMI=; b=Ka0jcCq7U3pYhuuWvSNLp3/E3LsvJrVf4tJvbmjY6sGjH6rVXA7F8fqutvCmlMZjTZ Hwa4YZY8GA9GWxkLjfHsvhfrqAivo95LiuplYumJY3Y6ZZq8KBGGdk0Hs7ODbEvFKqad nAFWKgXwBlkVHlNPdchr7y980uXIKTugG7rXwOBZ1foJwMeXg9vhtZ4VCjCNfrLUlIuz MJ5uesiyE9AVSaU3PFO/74Xpw8VWflWEtxy0htzrLC4vmceavF7eUbudW9UaJMp9sSHS 90CBmTBXVVqDEZtpFMQ93crexEEfgRKowUZEw3YFvJJPp47ra9cwoCn+F7hSX4RCBjl0 5MqA== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RlPWFpNm4rH2gEiCtlVoQRe185Yk4l5bCKKS4fT3tO8avT1arBjYhi+33KTftTTkA== X-Received: by 10.194.113.106 with SMTP id ix10mr6291wjb.7.1476793026676; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 05:17:06 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.25.199.84 with SMTP id x81ls2773205lff.18.gmail; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 05:17:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.25.206.138 with SMTP id e132mr140077lfg.39.1476793025069; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 05:17:05 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from blaine.gmane.org ([195.159.176.226]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 82si1485826lfz.230.2016.10.18.05.17.04 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 18 Oct 2016 05:17:04 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.159.176.226 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org) client-ip=195.159.176.226; Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bwTK1-0008Q2-5z for std-proposals@isocpp.org; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:16:45 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 45 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org In-Reply-To: <8a6731f7-1c9b-482d-817e-c2374fc9ae1b@isocpp.org> X-Original-Sender: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 195.159.176.226 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org) smtp.mailfrom=gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:28934 Archived-At: On 2016-10-18 12:03, mihailnajdenov@gmail.com wrote: > I was surprised to see > http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/experimental/observer_ptr > > I though, it was settled, raw pointers will be serving as non-owning > pointers? (and use references, as well not_null<> and owner<> to cover > corner cases and legacy) > > Also, observer_ptr is not without problems too. > > For instance, it has lifetime management API (reset, release) although > it does not manage lifetime! > > Right now if you see reset or release in code, it means the object > lifetime has been altered - either deleted, a ref dropped or no longer > managed. > observer_ptr will change that for the worse - these will start to mean > something different. > > Also, it can be well misleading, it monitors object lifetime - after all > other smart pointers /control /lifetime, this one is probably just > /observing/ it. > Having similar functions use the same names as functions of the slighlty smarter pointers, might help replacing those with an observer_pointer. Changing "release" into "stop_observing" (or something) doesn't appeal to me. If we look at a similar problem in merging "optional", "variant", and "any" into the draft standard, we ended up with two of them having a "bool has_value()" function, while the third got a "bool valueless_by_exception()". Not only do they have different names, but also different true/false return value for the same(?) condition - does it store anything. I think the "release" function for the pointer types is similar enough - give me the pointer, I'll take care of it! Bo Persson -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/msgid/std-proposals/nu53qp%24lvv%241%40blaine.gmane.org. .