On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 9:06 AM Matthew Woehlke via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
On 05/03/2020 06.29, J Decker via Std-Proposals wrote:
> Smart pointers continue to work as they do, because they are an object that
> contains a pointer to an object, and are not 'pointers'. they are of a
> class type 'smart pointer', they are not pointers to a class of type 'smart
> pointer'.

So... now when I go to refactor my code, replacing a raw pointer with a
smart pointer, my code now breaks, or worse, silently changes behavior?

And that's the other place I was going to mention and keep forgetting.
This code I'm recently working on I was using a local struct to read into, and subsequently was refactoring to just use a pointer into the cache the record really is, and it was quite annoying to have to adjust what operator I was using to get the object member values.

I see your point if you had also previously refactored to use '.' operator instead of ->.  But then again, that's what one can expect while refactoring?
 
No, thanks.

--
Matthew
--
Std-Proposals mailing list
Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals