What\'s the equivalent to the following:
std::vector vec;
vec.push_back(NULL);
when dealing with boost::shared_ptr
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.
Here's something which I think is a bit simpler and works just fine
( remember that typedef
is your friend ):
#include <cstdlib>
#include <vector>
#include <iostream>
#include <boost/shared_ptr.hpp>
typedef boost::shared_ptr< std::vector<char> > CharVecHandle;
inline CharVecHandle newCharVec(std::vector<char>::size_type size) {
return CharVecHandle(new std::vector<char>(size));
}
inline CharVecHandle newCharVec(void) {
return CharVecHandle();
}
int main ( void )
{
CharVecHandle cvh = newCharVec();
if (cvh == NULL)
std::cout << "It's NULL" << std::endl;
else
std::cout << "It's not NULL" << std::endl;
std::vector< CharVecHandle > cvh_vec;
cvh_vec.push_back(newCharVec(64));
cvh_vec.push_back(newCharVec());
// or call the NULL constructor directly
cvh_vec.push_back(CharVecHandle());
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
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
Yes, declare a global static null pointer.
In C++0x, you can simply convert from nullptr
to std::shared_ptr
:
std::vector< boost::shared_ptr<Foo> > vec;
vec.push_back(nullptr);
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.