I often find myself wanting to write code like this:
class MyClass
{
public:
void addObject(std::unique_ptr<Object>&& newObject);
void removeObject(const Object* target);
private:
std::set<std::unique_ptr<Object>> objects;
};
However, much of the std::set interface is kind of useless with std::unique_ptrs since the lookup functions require std::unique_ptr parameters (which I obviously don't have because they're owned by the set itself).
I can think of two main solutions to this.
Create a temporary unique_ptr for lookup. For example, the above removeObject() could be implemented like:
void MyClass::removeObject(const Object* target)
{
std::unique_ptr<Object> targetSmartPtr(target);
objects.erase(targetSmartPtr);
targetSmartPtr.release();
}
Replace the set with a map of raw pointers to unique_ptrs.
// ...
std::map<const Object*, std::unique_ptr<Object>> objects;
};
However, both seem slightly stupid to me. In solution 1, erase() isn't noexcept, so the temporary unique_ptr might delete the object it doesn't really own, and 2 requires double the storage for the container unnecessarily.
I know about Boost's pointer containers, but their current features are limited compared to modern C++11 standard library containers.
I was recently reading about C++14 and came across "Adding heterogeneous comparison lookup to associative containers". But form my understanding of it, the lookup types must be comparable to the key types, but raw pointers aren't comparable to unique_ptrs.
Anyone know of a more elegant solution or an upcoming addition to C++ that solves this problem?
See Question&Answers more detail:
os 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…