I have a question about C++11 best practices. When clearing a shared_ptr, should I use the reset()
function with no parameter, or should I set the shared_ptr
to nullptr
? For example:
std::shared_ptr<std::string> foo(new std::string("foo"));
foo.reset();
foo = nullptr;
Is there any real difference, or are there advantages/disadvantages to either approach?
Is there any real difference, or are there advantages/disadvantages to either approach?
The two alternatives are absolutely equivalent, in the sense that the second form (foo = nullptr
) is defined in terms of the first one. Per Paragraph 20.7.1.2.3/8-10 of the C++11 Standard:
unique_ptr& operator=(nullptr_t) noexcept;
8 Effects:
reset()
.9 Postcondition:
get() == nullptr
10 Returns:
*this
.
Therefore, just choose the one which makes its intent clearest for you. Personally, I prefer:
foo = nullptr;
Because it makes it more evident that we want the pointer to be null. As a general advice, however, try to minimize the situations where you need to explicitly reset a smart pointer.
Besides, rather than using new
:
std::shared_ptr<std::string> foo(new std::string("foo"));
Consider using std::make_shared()
when possible:
auto foo = std::make_shared<std::string>("foo");