Ensuring pointer is not deleted

I've stumbled onto something I can't figure out, so I think I'm missing something in the greater C++ picture.

In short, my question is: how to keep a mutable, non-deletable, possibly NULL instance of an object in a class.

The longer version is:

I have the following scenario: a bunch of classes (which I can change slightly, but not thoroughly refactor), most of which need to use an object. This object, while mutable, is managed by someone else so it must not be deleted.

Some of the classes in the bunch do not need such an object - they reuse code from other classes, but through the available parameters supplied to these classes it is guaranteed that even if an object is supplied, it will not be used.

The current imp开发者_运维技巧lementation uses a pointer-to-const-object (const Obj *). This, in turn, means all the object's methods must be const and most fields mutable. This is a messy solution since the fields declared mutable are available for inspection (so quite the opposite of the c++ lite entry here). It also only partially solves the "do-not-delete-this-here" issue (compiler does not complain but a const in front of the object is an indication).

If I used a reference to this object, I'd force some callers to create a "dummy" object and provide it to the class they are instantiating. This is also messy, besides being a waste of resources. I cannot create a global object to can stand in for a "NULL" reference due to project restrictions.

I feel that the reference is the tool I need, but I cannot refactor the classes involved to such an extent as to have the object disappear from their implementations where it is not used (it can be done, but it is not simple and it would not be fast). So I want to implement something simpler, which will just draw an alarm signal if anyone tries to misuse this object, but keeps my object mutable.

The best solution I can think of is using a const-pointer-to-object (Obj * const) - this does not make the compiler complain, but I have my mutable object and a sort-of alarm signal -through the const - in place as well.

Does anyone have a better idea ?

I've traditionally seen these kind of scenarios implemented using a shared_ptr/weak_ptr combo. See here.

The owner/deleter would get a

boost::shared_ptr<T>

Your class would get a

boost::weak_ptr<T>

To reassign the weak ptr, simply reassign the pointer:

void MyClass::Reassign(boost::weak_ptr<T> tPtr)
{
    m_tPtr = tPtr;
}

To use the weak ptr, first check to see if it's still around:

void MyClass::Use()
{
    boost::shared_ptr<T> m_temporarySharedPtr = m_tPtr.lock();
    if (m_temporarySharedPtr)
    {
        //...
    }
}

The weak ptr can be made "NULL" by reseting it, or assigning it to an empty shared_ptr

void MyClass::MakeNull()
{
    m_tPtr.reset();
}

You can make the destructor of that object private. That will trigger compile time error on attemp to delete object. Also you should allow restcted code to delete object by using friends mechanism or member function.

You can put a wrapper around the pointer to allow modification but not deletion:

template <typename T> class Wrapper
{
public:
    Wrapper(T *p=0) : pointer(p) {}

    T       *operator->()       {return pointer;}
    T const *operator->() const {return pointer;}
    operator bool()       const {return pointer;}

private:
    T *pointer;
};

You can use this just like a pointer to the template type in some contexts, but can't call delete on it. The wrapped type must be a struct or class type (i.e. a type where -> makes sense). Then one of your classes that uses, but doesn't manage the lifetime of, the object would look a bit like this:

class User
{
public:
    void Assign(Object *o) {object = o;}
    void UseObject() {if (object) object->Use();}

private:
    Wrapper<Object> object;
};

Technically, you can still get at the raw pointer, but the code to do it is very wrong-looking:

delete wrapper.operator->();

Sounds like a case for a shared_ptr.

An alternative (if allowed by your restircitons) would be to create a dummy object similar to a shared pointer to act as a wrapper between the object in question and your classes.

Your classes can attempt to delete this object if they wish, but it itself will leave the original object untouched. Overload the * operator and you can use it transparently.

something like this?...

the Obj class is an aggregation of your new class, you point at it with an Obj* cont pObj, which you set up at the creation of your new class (or leave as 0 if it's not used), you then check pObj before calling any of its functions?

if ( pObj ){ pObj->foo(); }

if the function foo's incorrectly defined as mutable then you need to fix its declaration.

your new class isn't responsible for cleaning up/deleting the Obj class.