I'm using C++ with the OpenCV library, which is a library image-processing although that's not relevant for this question. Currently I have a design decision to make.
OpenCV, being a C library, has its data structures (such as CvMat) declared as structs. To create them, you use functions like cvCreateMat, and to release them, you use functions like cvReleaseMat. Being a C++ programmer, I created a special cv_scoped
class which would automatically call cvReleaseMat when it went out of scope (like boost::scoped_ptr
).
What I'm realising now is that I wish I could use auto_ptr
and shared_ptr
in cases as well. I just feel that writing code for my own cv_auto_ptr
and cv_shared_ptr
classes would be a bad idea, not to mention a waste of time. So I've been looking for solutions, and I've come up with three possibilities.
First, I could use the cv_scoped class I've already made. I'd rename it to cv_ptr
and then use smart pointers like so: std::auto_ptr<cv_ptr>
. The annoying thing about this though is, I'd always have to dereference twice:
std::auto_ptr<cv_ptr> matrix(cv_ptr(cvCreateMat(320, 240, CV_32FC3)));
cvPow(matrix.get()->get()); // one get for the auto_ptr, one for the cv_ptr
I know it looks like I could declare an implicit conversion, but I couldn't actually - most of OpenCV's functions have the parameter void* - so no implicit conversion would be called. I would really like a way of doing this where I didn't have to do the double dereference.
Second, I could somehow override operator delete
. I don't want to override the global operator delete because I'd only want this to apply to CvMat (and a few other) types. However, I can't change the library, so I can't add operator delete
to the CvMat struct. So I don't know how this would work.
Third, I could just rewrite my own auto_ptr
, scoped_ptr
, and shared_ptr
. They're not large classes so it wouldn't be too difficult, but I just feel like this is bad design. If I were to do this, I would probably do something along these lines:
class cv_auto_ptr {
public:
cv_auto_ptr();
~cv_auto_ptr();
// each method would just be a proxy for the smart pointer
CvMat* get() { return this->matrix_.get()->get(); }
// all the other operators/methods in auto_ptr would be the same, you get the idea
private:
auto_ptr<cv_ptr> matrix_; // cv_ptr deletes CvMat properly
}
What would you do in my situation? Please help me figure this one out.