Re: [boost] [smart_ptr] Interest in the missing smart pointer (that can target the stack)

On February 3, 2016 3:19:15 PM EST, Emil Dotchevski wrote:

Can't make C++ less messy or less complicated or more safe without breaking it. If you're looking to avoid the possibility of undefined behavior, C++ is not the language for you.

We regularly eschew aspects of the language in favor of safer alternatives. Smart pointers are a prime example of that. Having Robert's safe integers, or Noah's classes, is a similar tool in the box. The question is how safe they should be and whether they should offer ways to forego that safety when desired or needed. ___ Rob (Sent from my portable computation engine)