Closed tlanc007 closed 8 years ago
I agree that this is confusing and should be fixed at least for the cases, where T* and owner
So in this case, only the owner in the code block should be changed and leave the two instances in the Note section as they are?
Sorry, if I wasn't clear: No, I think all instances of owner<T>
should be changed to owner<T*>
.
Altough I'm not 100% sure that owner is actually limited to raw pointer types, I can't think of a different type for which it would make sense right now.
A patch has been submitted and merged. Closing this out.
The third example (just before Exceptions) reads:
Shouldn't there be an asterisk with the T to make it an pointer? *owner<T> p**;
In this section there are a number of places in the text where owner is given without the asterisk. For example in Note. For consistency, shouldn't the asterisk be considered a part of the owner notation? So the two cases in Note should be changed to read *owner<T>**.
For a moment, this section made me think that the asterisk was a part of the template definition in the GSL. Which is not the case.
If this seems reasonable, I am willing to make the pull request and submit the fix