Consistent use of shared_ptr

Registered by Anders Logg on 2012-06-14

The use of shared_ptr in the C++ interface is inconsistent. We should strive to use boost:shared_ptr uniformly throughout all classes, but provide simplified constructors (reference_to_no_delete_pointer) to allow user-code that only works with references. Return types should be shared_ptr. One example is the MeshFunction class which should store the Mesh as a shared_ptr.

Blueprint information

Status:
Not started
Approver:
None
Priority:
Medium
Drafter:
None
Direction:
Needs approval
Assignee:
None
Definition:
Discussion
Series goal:
None
Implementation:
Unknown
Milestone target:
None

Related branches

Whiteboard

GNW: Simplified reference constructors should be minimised since they require hand-modification of the SWIG layer, which it not done will cause Python memory errors.

(?)

Work Items

This blueprint contains Public information 
Everyone can see this information.

Subscribers

No subscribers.