kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Dick Hollenbeck <dick@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 09/13/2010 09:47 AM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> Is there a set criteria for the Boost include files that are part of Kicad?
> The reason I ask is I wanted to use boost::shared_ptr to solve an issue I was
> having while working on the new component library code an found that there are
> some missing header files that prevent using boost::shared_ptr.  This was
> easily solved by adding the missing files to the Kicad source.  I had just
> assumed (mistake on my part) that we were using the full Boost header install.
>  Obviously that is not the case.  I just wanted to make sure there is no
> technical (or philosophical) reason not to include the additional headers
> required to use boost::shared_ptr before I make any commits.  Maybe we should
> just include all of the Boost headers rather than a subset even though it would
> add quite a bit of code to the Kicad source.  Anyone else have any thoughts on
> this?
>
> Wayne
>   

I probably would never personally use shared_ptr because in my mind it
is slightly beyond what an average C++ programmer uses on a day to day
basis, and it obscures the clear notion of "object ownership".

I have never (I am old, this is a long long time, and countless lines of
code) been in a position where I could not assign object ownership
clearly to one container over another.  If ever this became obscure, I
would probably backup and take another look.

Object ownership is something to keep one's eye on.


Dick