RE: [reSIProcate] RE: Boost and resiprocate

["Derek MacDonald" <derek@xxxxxxxx>]

I would rather we lift a standard(and soon to be *the* standard) smart ptr
that is well tested rather than using the vocal smart ptr.  Also, I don't
think the vocal smart ptr has nice cast operators/etc.

--Derek

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

This email and any files transmitted with it contains proprietary
information and, unless expressly stated otherwise, all contents and
attachments are confidential. This email is intended for the addressee(s)
only and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an addressee,
any disclosure, distribution, printing or copying of the contents of this
email or its attachments, or any action taken in reliance on it, is
unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform
the sender immediately and then delete this email and any copies of it.
Thank you for your co-operation.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:resiprocate-
> devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of kaiduan xie
> Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 10:49 AM
> To: Scott Godin; resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: 'Karl Mutch'
> Subject: Re: [reSIProcate] RE: Boost and resiprocate
> 
> I think one of the resiprocate's design philosophy is
> to be self-contained at the beginning (it only depends
> on ARES). I still prefer to use VOVCAL's
> implementation for smart pointer, I have not found any
> reason why VOCAL's implementation can not be used for
> this case. Scott, can you take a look at VOCAL's
> implementation.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> kaiduan
> --- Scott Godin <slgodin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > This might not be a bad plan.  I think there are
> > differing opinions amongst
> > the resip developers on this one.  If this does
> > indeed become generally
> > accepted at some time, then it won't take make to
> > switch all references from
> > the resip namespace shared pointer to the boost one.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Karl Mutch [mailto:kmutch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 3:31 AM
> > To: slgodin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Boost and resiprocate
> >
> > For the longer term outlook would it not be better
> > to more widely adopt
> > boost
> > once the May release is complete as specific
> > components such as the smart
> > pointers
> > are up for review by the standards committee and are
> > likely to pass through
> > into the standard?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Karl
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > resiprocate-devel mailing list
> > resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
> >
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel