[C++-sig] Transfer of ownership

[Eric Jardim]

Hi, all...

This is a simple question. I was reading the docs where it says about the 
"transfer of ownership" of a C++ object pointer. I am dealing exacly this 
situation, where the "with_custodian_and_ward" policy is not enough to 
prevent Python objects to delete C++ couterparts. The only hack is to hold 
references, but it is not a complete solution.

So, I read the FAQ entry where it explain how to deal with this issue:
http://www.boost.org/libs/python/doc/v2/faq.html#ownership

But there, it speaks about using an "std::auto_ptr". On the other side, I am 
using "boost::shared_ptr" to hold my objects. I really do not know the 
difference between them, but I imagine they provide similar funcionality. 

So I will split my question in 3 parts:
- Is it possible to take the ownership with "boost::shared_ptr", or do I 
have to change my held types to "std::auto_ptr"?
- Is there any difference in practice, using boost's or std's smart 
pointers? I just use them for holding Boost.Python extensions.
- As those functions with smart pointers do not exists, I suppose that I 
will have to write wrappers like:

void b_insert(B& b, std::auto_ptr<A> a)
{
    b.insert(a.get());
    a.release();
}


Is there any special reason for this to be a non-const reference to "b"? 
Could it be a const reference or a const/non-const pointer to "b"? Is there 
any implications?

Thanks,

[Eric Jardim]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/cplusplus-sig/attachments/20050810/bf28d0d4/attachment.htm>