Does it make sense to use std::shared_ptr<std::vector> instead of boost::shared_array?

Question

Now I'm rewriting a part of my code to use C++11 standard. In some places I found the following code:

boost::shared_array<uint8_t> array;

Does it make to replace it with:

std::shared_ptr<std::vector<uint8_t>> array;

I'm trying to replace all boost's functionality that already presented in C++11 in my code.

I need to clarify a bit. Actually I need a raw array (but with refcount, so it can be automatically deleted), no need for all those vector features. So boost::shared_array solves the problem I want without any additional cost. But I'm trying to make my code uses new standard as much as possible (though many libraries from boost still not covered by the new standard).

Thanks.

Well, you could get rid of a boost dependency in that case. For the rest, it's functionally equivalent at a high level. — Germán Diago
– Germán Diago, Commented May 13, 2013 at 15:59

Bartek Banachewicz · Accepted Answer · 2013-05-13 11:18:04Z

4

Given the current state of affairs in C++11 support in compilers and the laziness of people maintaing builds, I would leave that as-is now. Boost has the nice property of working virtually everywhere, including old compilers, and the change you want to make will hardly improve the code.

This code also isn't exactly the same.

answered May 13, 2013 at 11:18

Bartek Banachewicz

39.5k8 gold badges100 silver badges141 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

14 Comments

rubenvb Over a year ago

@maverik: C++11 has shared_ptr<T[]> and unique_ptr<T[]> specializations, which I guess fullfill exactly that purpose.

Andy Prowl Over a year ago

@rubenvb: C++11 does not have a shared_ptr<T[]> specialization, you have to provide your own custom deleter to make shared_ptr work with arrays.

sehe Over a year ago

@AndyProwl Wait, what? That's absolutely not how I remember it. Valgrind would have told me differently if it were true

Bartek Banachewicz Over a year ago

Andy is right here, you have to supply proper deleter to shared_ptr for it to work correctly. If it worked for you @sehe, that might be just your standard library playing nice, but the standard doesn't have it.

Andy Prowl Over a year ago

@sehe: Indeed, the specialization for std::unique_ptr<> is defined in the Standard. Btw here is the proposal to have shared_ptr<T[]> as well

|

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Does it make sense to use std::shared_ptr<std::vector> instead of boost::shared_array?

1 Answer 1

14 Comments

Your Answer

Linked

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

1 Answer 1

14 Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Linked

Related