Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I think you mean "The entire problem here is incorrectly assuming that "A has a pointer to B" implies "A owns B"."

Although perhaps I'm wrong.




Not quite what I meant. What I meant was that the hidden assumption is that ownership must be expressed through a direct pointer, leading him to ignore the possibility of something like std::list, which doesn't have a direct pointer to all the nodes.


Aw, I see now. Thanks!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: