No, it's not true. If a function needs a pointer and has nothing to do with ownership, then I strongly believe that a regular pointer should be passed for the following reasons:
- No ownership, therefore you don't know what kind of a smart pointer to pass
- If you pass a specific pointer, like
shared_ptr
, then you won't be able to pass, say, scoped_ptr
The rule would be this - if you know that an entity must take a certain kind of ownership of the object, always use smart pointers - the one that gives you the kind of ownership you need. If there is no notion of ownership, never use smart pointers.
Example1:
void PrintObject(shared_ptr<const Object> po) //bad
{
if(po)
po->Print();
else
log_error();
}
void PrintObject(const Object* po) //good
{
if(po)
po->Print();
else
log_error();
}
Example2:
Object* createObject() //bad
{
return new Object;
}
some_smart_ptr<Object> createObject() //good
{
return some_smart_ptr<Object>(new Object);
}
与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…