Re: [reSIProcate] Reference Counting Smart Pointer
Kaiduan Xie's point about thread safety trumps all arguments -- the semantics
can't be the same as boost's (non-thread safe) shared pointer.
I am partial to, ahem, borrowing. Yes, code reuse in its most primitive form.
With credit, of course.
Not that I expect to get it, but I would prefer simply resip::Shared<T>.
'SharedPtr' smacks of Hungarian notation.
To answer the question about VOCAL's use of smart pointer versus resip non-use
of smart pointers, it was decided early on that efficiency was more important
than convenience for the resip core.
However, I am OK with smart pointers in an application framework like
DUM, where
convenience can arguably be more important than efficiency, particularly in a
user endpoint.
david