Monday, August 26, 2019

c++ - Which kind of pointer do I use when?



Ok, so the last time I wrote C++ for a living, std::auto_ptr was all the std lib had available, and boost::shared_ptr was all the rage. I never really looked into the other smart pointer types boost provided. I understand that C++11 now provides some of the types boost came up with, but not all of them.



So does someone have a simple algorithm to determine when to use which smart pointer? Preferably including advice regarding dumb pointers (raw pointers like T*) and the rest of the boost smart pointers. (Something like this would be great).


Answer



Shared ownership:
The shared_ptr and weak_ptr the standard adopted are pretty much the same as their Boost counterparts. Use them when you need to share a resource and don't know which one will be the last to be alive. Use weak_ptr to observe the shared resource without influencing its lifetime, not to break cycles. Cycles with shared_ptr shouldn't normally happen - two resources can't own each other.




Note that Boost additionally offers shared_array, which might be a suitable alternative to shared_ptr const>.



Next, Boost offers intrusive_ptr, which are a lightweight solution if your resource offers reference-counted management already and you want to adopt it to the RAII principle. This one was not adopted by the standard.



Unique ownership:
Boost also has a scoped_ptr, which is not copyable and for which you can not specify a deleter. std::unique_ptr is boost::scoped_ptr on steroids and should be your default choice when you need a smart pointer. It allows you to specify a deleter in its template arguments and is movable, unlike boost::scoped_ptr. It is also fully usable in STL containers as long as you don't use operations that need copyable types (obviously).



Note again, that Boost has an array version: scoped_array, which the standard unified by requiring std::unique_ptr partial specialization that will delete[] the pointer instead of deleteing it (with the default_deleter). std::unique_ptr also offers operator[] instead of operator* and operator->.



Note that std::auto_ptr is still in the standard, but it is deprecated.

§D.10 [depr.auto.ptr]




The class template auto_ptr is deprecated. [ Note: The class template unique_ptr (20.7.1) provides a better solution. —end note ]




No ownership:
Use dumb pointers (raw pointers) or references for non-owning references to resources and when you know that the resource will outlive the referencing object / scope. Prefer references and use raw pointers when you need either nullability or resettability.



If you want a non-owning reference to a resource, but you don't know if the resource will outlive the object that references it, pack the resource in a shared_ptr and use a weak_ptr - you can test if the parent shared_ptr is alive with lock, which will return a shared_ptr that is non-null if the resource still exists. If want to test whether the resource is dead, use expired. The two may sound similar, but are very different in the face of concurrent execution, as expired only guarantees its return value for that single statement. A seemingly innocent test like




if(!wptr.expired())
something_assuming_the_resource_is_still_alive();


is a potential race condition.


No comments:

Post a Comment

hard drive - Leaving bad sectors in unformatted partition?

Laptop was acting really weird, and copy and seek times were really slow, so I decided to scan the hard drive surface. I have a couple hundr...