Take a look at Anthony williams‘ jss::object_ptr. I consider it an improved version of observer_ptr

Peter

sent from a mobile device so please excuse strange words due to autocorrection.
Prof. Peter Sommerlad
peter.Sommerlad_at_[hidden]
+41-79-432 23 32

> On 11 Nov 2019, at 06:34, Steve Weinrich via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> 
> Well, the inclusion in the extensions is by no means a guarantee of inclusion in a future standard. A quick Google search reveals this view:
>
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=2ahUKEwi3qPeJtuHlAhXY7Z4KHX0oAKwQFjABegQIBBAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.open-std.org%2Fjtc1%2Fsc22%2Fwg21%2Fdocs%2Fpapers%2F2019%2Fp1408r0.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0c3gIhAirNc6KT1xM_FmMM
>
>
> In any case, it seems that my notion is not new. Thanks!
>
>> On Sun, Nov 10, 2019, 22:20 Jorg Brown <jorg.brown_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> > Is it in serious consideration?
>>
>> Consideration for what? It's part of Version 2 of the C++ Extensions for Library Fundamentals, ISO/IEC TS 19568:2017.
>>
>> Code such as this currently compiles:
>>
>> #include <experimental/memory>
>>
>> int f() {
>> int a = 1;
>> std::experimental::observer_ptr<int> op(&a);
>> *op += 1;
>> return a;
>> }
>>
>> As can be seen at https://godbolt.org/z/GQFeh4
>>
>> = - = - = - = - =
>>
>> > the current convention of using raw pointers to represent transient pointers.
>>
>> std::span<T, 1> might also fill that need, depending on your application.
>>
>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 9:09 PM Steve Weinrich via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> None. I was not aware of observer_ptr. Is it in serious consideration?
>>>
>>>> On Sun, Nov 10, 2019, 22:03 Andrew Tomazos <andrewtomazos_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>> How does it differ from:
>>>>
>>>> https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/experimental/observer_ptr
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 1:45 PM Steve Weinrich via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>>> I was thinking that a non_owned_ptr would be a good std addition. The idea is to formalize the current convention of using raw pointers to represent transient pointers (transient_ptr might be a better name).
>>>>>
>>>>> Aside from a lot of details, it would simply be a template wrapper around a raw pointer. On destruction, the wrapper would do nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>> This would allow the enforcement of the intended behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you all think?
>>>>> --
>>>>> Std-Proposals mailing list
>>>>> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>>>>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>>> --
>>> Std-Proposals mailing list
>>> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals