From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/50139 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Abrahams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: `W w' (gnus-article-fill-cited-article) Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 08:37:34 -0500 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1045402629 24642 80.91.224.249 (16 Feb 2003 13:37:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 13:37:09 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18kOyi-0006PK-00 for ; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 14:37:08 +0100 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 18kOzY-0004mq-00; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 07:38:00 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Sun, 16 Feb 2003 07:38:58 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from main.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.224.249]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA13508 for ; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 07:38:46 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18kOwz-0006Lh-00 for ; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 14:35:21 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: ding@hpc.uh.edu Original-Received: from news by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18kOwy-0006LY-00 for ; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 14:35:20 +0100 Original-Lines: 47 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org X-Gnus-Agent-Gcc: nnimap+www.stlport.com:INBOX User-Agent: Gnus/5.090014 (Oort Gnus v0.14) Emacs/21.2 (i386-msvc-nt5.1.2600) Cancel-Lock: sha1:bWjrEDeHarJIIBs8djLTSHvid18= Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:50139 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:50139 I've been noticing some inconvenient behavior from the wrap-washing function of the subject line. I applied it to a message containing: >> Like you Peter, I've been trying to explore the use cases of >> move_ptr/scoped_ptr. In my own code I use these types of smart >> pointers only in a scope where under non-exceptional conditions the >> smart pointer is moved from (release'd) to client code. Only under >> exceptional conditions does the scoped_ptr actually delete anything. >> In this context, client code must know exactly how the resource is >> allocated and deallocated. > > True enough, and the primary use of auto_ptr/move_ptr is to return > things > from a factory function when the client needs to know exactly how the > resource has been allocated. That's why I think that an enhanced > scoped/move/auto_ptr needs its deallocator encoded in the type as a > template > parameter, so that the client knows what resource management scheme > they are > dealing with. And what I got out was: >> Like you Peter, I've been trying to explore the use cases of >> move_ptr/scoped_ptr. In my own code I use these types of smart >> pointers only in a scope where under non-exceptional conditions the >> smart pointer is moved from (release'd) to client code. Only under >> exceptional conditions does the scoped_ptr actually delete >> anything. In this context, client code must know exactly how the >> resource is allocated and deallocated. > True enough, and the primary use of auto_ptr/move_ptr is to return > things from a factory function when the client needs to know exactly > how the resource has been allocated. That's why I think that an > enhanced scoped/move/auto_ptr needs its deallocator encoded in the > type as a template parameter, so that the client knows what resource > management scheme they are dealing with. In other words, the blank line between the two separate quotations disappeared. Is there a way to prevent this from happening? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com