A null shared_ptr does serve the same purpose as a raw null pointer. It might indicate the non-availability of data. However, for the most part, there is no reason for a null shared_ptr to possess a control block or a managed nullptr .
shared_ptr is now part of the C++11 Standard, as std::shared_ptr . Starting with Boost release 1.53, shared_ptr can be used to hold a pointer to a dynamically allocated array. This is accomplished by using an array type ( T[] or T[N] ) as the template parameter.
std::shared_ptr::getReturns the stored pointer. The stored pointer points to the object the shared_ptr object dereferences to, which is generally the same as its owned pointer.
The shared_ptr type is a smart pointer in the C++ standard library that is designed for scenarios in which more than one owner might have to manage the lifetime of the object in memory.
Your suggestion (calling the shared_ptr<T>
constructor with no argument) is correct. (Calling the constructor with the value 0 is equivalent.) I don't think that this would be any slower than calling vec.push_back()
with a pre-existing shared_ptr<T>
, since construction is required in both cases (either direct construction or copy-construction).
But if you want "nicer" syntax, you could try the following code:
class {
public:
template<typename T>
operator shared_ptr<T>() { return shared_ptr<T>(); }
} nullPtr;
This declares a single global object nullPtr
, which enables the following natural syntax:
shared_ptr<int> pi(new int(42));
shared_ptr<SomeArbitraryType> psat(new SomeArbitraryType("foonly"));
...
pi = nullPtr;
psat = nullPtr;
Note that if you use this in multiple translation units (source files), you'll need to give the class a name (e.g. _shared_null_ptr_type
), move the definition of the nullPtr
object to a separate .cpp file, and add extern
declarations in the header file where the class is defined.
Well, this is legal:
shared_ptr<Foo> foo; /* don't assign */
And in this state, it doesn't point to anything. You can even test this property:
if (foo) {
// it points to something
} else {
// no it doesn't
}
So why not do this:
std::vector < shared_ptr<Foo> > vec;
vec.push_back (shared_ptr<Foo>); // push an unassigned one
In C++0x, you can simply convert from nullptr
to std::shared_ptr
:
std::vector< boost::shared_ptr<Foo> > vec;
vec.push_back(nullptr);
You could declare a global nullPtr
for shared_ptr<Foo>
. But if you pollute the global namespace, what would you call the global nullPtr
for shared_ptr<Bar>
?
Typically I declare the null ptr as a static in the class of the pointer.
#include <boost\shared_ptr.hpp>
class Foo; // forward decl
typedef boost::shared_ptr<Foo> FooPtr;
class Foo
{
public:
static FooPtr Null;
}
...
// define static in cpp file
FooPtr Foo::Null;
...
// use Foo Null
vec.push_back(Foo::Null);
That way each class has a static Null.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With