Set shared_ptr with new_pointer that is old_pointer + offset
Here is a smart pointer: std::shared_ptr<char> p(new char[size])
which represents array filled with raw binary file content. After (and only after) the whole array is copied from file to RAM, I can parse it, and during this I retrieve some header information (a few first dwords). Then actual data follows.
Without giving much more context, it's handy for me to to set mentioned shared pointer to new address that is beginning of actual data. This address is still in alocated memory. But how to set without losing it?
A question is (yes/no): Is it possible to set p
to offset of prevous pointer, without invoking deletion of data?
c++ shared-ptr smart-pointers pointer-arithmetic
|
show 1 more comment
Here is a smart pointer: std::shared_ptr<char> p(new char[size])
which represents array filled with raw binary file content. After (and only after) the whole array is copied from file to RAM, I can parse it, and during this I retrieve some header information (a few first dwords). Then actual data follows.
Without giving much more context, it's handy for me to to set mentioned shared pointer to new address that is beginning of actual data. This address is still in alocated memory. But how to set without losing it?
A question is (yes/no): Is it possible to set p
to offset of prevous pointer, without invoking deletion of data?
c++ shared-ptr smart-pointers pointer-arithmetic
2
Unfortunately, shared pointers don't work this way, and this cannot be done. You will need to find some other way to accomplish this goal. The short answer is: "no".
– Sam Varshavchik
9 hours ago
3
This sounds like a case where you'd want to pass a raw pointer instead of ashared_ptr
.
– Jeremy Friesner
9 hours ago
^^^ that's what it seems. Or tote around a offset value and base your data-read fromp.get() + header_len
. Trying to change the shared pointerp
itself seems odd here.
– WhozCraig
9 hours ago
@JeremyFriesner I know and I will handle this situation, because I coded this shared pointer myself and futhermore I can read from file and parse simultaneously (lied in question). Just was wondering are smart pointers that good for low-level binary work. Thanks for suggestion.
– Alex Larionov
9 hours ago
Usevector<char>
instead of a raw array.
– Ulrich Eckhardt
9 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Here is a smart pointer: std::shared_ptr<char> p(new char[size])
which represents array filled with raw binary file content. After (and only after) the whole array is copied from file to RAM, I can parse it, and during this I retrieve some header information (a few first dwords). Then actual data follows.
Without giving much more context, it's handy for me to to set mentioned shared pointer to new address that is beginning of actual data. This address is still in alocated memory. But how to set without losing it?
A question is (yes/no): Is it possible to set p
to offset of prevous pointer, without invoking deletion of data?
c++ shared-ptr smart-pointers pointer-arithmetic
Here is a smart pointer: std::shared_ptr<char> p(new char[size])
which represents array filled with raw binary file content. After (and only after) the whole array is copied from file to RAM, I can parse it, and during this I retrieve some header information (a few first dwords). Then actual data follows.
Without giving much more context, it's handy for me to to set mentioned shared pointer to new address that is beginning of actual data. This address is still in alocated memory. But how to set without losing it?
A question is (yes/no): Is it possible to set p
to offset of prevous pointer, without invoking deletion of data?
c++ shared-ptr smart-pointers pointer-arithmetic
c++ shared-ptr smart-pointers pointer-arithmetic
edited 8 hours ago
Christophe
39.8k43576
39.8k43576
asked 9 hours ago
Alex LarionovAlex Larionov
15416
15416
2
Unfortunately, shared pointers don't work this way, and this cannot be done. You will need to find some other way to accomplish this goal. The short answer is: "no".
– Sam Varshavchik
9 hours ago
3
This sounds like a case where you'd want to pass a raw pointer instead of ashared_ptr
.
– Jeremy Friesner
9 hours ago
^^^ that's what it seems. Or tote around a offset value and base your data-read fromp.get() + header_len
. Trying to change the shared pointerp
itself seems odd here.
– WhozCraig
9 hours ago
@JeremyFriesner I know and I will handle this situation, because I coded this shared pointer myself and futhermore I can read from file and parse simultaneously (lied in question). Just was wondering are smart pointers that good for low-level binary work. Thanks for suggestion.
– Alex Larionov
9 hours ago
Usevector<char>
instead of a raw array.
– Ulrich Eckhardt
9 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
2
Unfortunately, shared pointers don't work this way, and this cannot be done. You will need to find some other way to accomplish this goal. The short answer is: "no".
– Sam Varshavchik
9 hours ago
3
This sounds like a case where you'd want to pass a raw pointer instead of ashared_ptr
.
– Jeremy Friesner
9 hours ago
^^^ that's what it seems. Or tote around a offset value and base your data-read fromp.get() + header_len
. Trying to change the shared pointerp
itself seems odd here.
– WhozCraig
9 hours ago
@JeremyFriesner I know and I will handle this situation, because I coded this shared pointer myself and futhermore I can read from file and parse simultaneously (lied in question). Just was wondering are smart pointers that good for low-level binary work. Thanks for suggestion.
– Alex Larionov
9 hours ago
Usevector<char>
instead of a raw array.
– Ulrich Eckhardt
9 hours ago
2
2
Unfortunately, shared pointers don't work this way, and this cannot be done. You will need to find some other way to accomplish this goal. The short answer is: "no".
– Sam Varshavchik
9 hours ago
Unfortunately, shared pointers don't work this way, and this cannot be done. You will need to find some other way to accomplish this goal. The short answer is: "no".
– Sam Varshavchik
9 hours ago
3
3
This sounds like a case where you'd want to pass a raw pointer instead of a
shared_ptr
.– Jeremy Friesner
9 hours ago
This sounds like a case where you'd want to pass a raw pointer instead of a
shared_ptr
.– Jeremy Friesner
9 hours ago
^^^ that's what it seems. Or tote around a offset value and base your data-read from
p.get() + header_len
. Trying to change the shared pointer p
itself seems odd here.– WhozCraig
9 hours ago
^^^ that's what it seems. Or tote around a offset value and base your data-read from
p.get() + header_len
. Trying to change the shared pointer p
itself seems odd here.– WhozCraig
9 hours ago
@JeremyFriesner I know and I will handle this situation, because I coded this shared pointer myself and futhermore I can read from file and parse simultaneously (lied in question). Just was wondering are smart pointers that good for low-level binary work. Thanks for suggestion.
– Alex Larionov
9 hours ago
@JeremyFriesner I know and I will handle this situation, because I coded this shared pointer myself and futhermore I can read from file and parse simultaneously (lied in question). Just was wondering are smart pointers that good for low-level binary work. Thanks for suggestion.
– Alex Larionov
9 hours ago
Use
vector<char>
instead of a raw array.– Ulrich Eckhardt
9 hours ago
Use
vector<char>
instead of a raw array.– Ulrich Eckhardt
9 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Yes this is possible. You can use constructor 8
, the aliasing constructor from this reference: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/shared_ptr/shared_ptr
// make sure you use an array deleter
std::shared_ptr<char> osp(new char[1024], std::default_delete<char>());
// load the data into your buffer at osp.get()
// Find the offset in the data by parsing
auto const offset = parse_buffer_for_offset(osp.get());
// Now set a new offset into the data
std::shared_ptr<char> nsp(osp, osp.get() + offset);
Now nsp.get()
returns the offset address but the original array will get deleted properly.
Note: The offset is a property of each shared_ptr
so if you copy the shared_ptr
nsp
you get another shared_ptr
with the same offset. This works whether you construct a new copy or assign a copy to an existing shared_ptr
.
This means you can have different shared_ptr
with different offsets that all manage the same, underlying resource which will only be cleaned up after all shared_ptr
are destroyed.
To see this in operation consider the following code:
std::shared_ptr<char> original_sp(new char[1024], std::default_delete<char>());
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_100_sp1(original_sp, original_sp.get() + 100);
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_100_sp2 = offset_100_sp1;
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_200_sp1(original_sp, original_sp.get() + 200);
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_200_sp2 = offset_200_sp1;
std::cout << "nPointers managing the array: " << original_sp.use_count() << 'n';
std::cout << "nOffset 100 pointers:" << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_100_sp1.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_100_sp2.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << "nOffset 200 pointers:" << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_200_sp1.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_200_sp2.get()) << 'n';
Output:
Pointers managing the array: 5
Offset 100 pointers:
100
100
Offset 200 pointers:
200
200
1
Yes this is exactly what the aliasing constructor is for!
– n.m.
9 hours ago
Of course, while this shares ownership with theshared_ptr
used during creation (and all its clones), the offset is not applied to any of the existing clones. So it's not clear to meet whether this meets the question's stated goal of "setting" the shared_ptr
– Ben Voigt
2 hours ago
@BenVoigt I have made a note to the effect that the offset belongs to eachshared_ptr
and that offsets are transferred to anothershared_ptr
when copied (either copy constructed or copy assigned).
– Galik
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54737556%2fset-shared-ptr-with-new-pointer-that-is-old-pointer-offset%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Yes this is possible. You can use constructor 8
, the aliasing constructor from this reference: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/shared_ptr/shared_ptr
// make sure you use an array deleter
std::shared_ptr<char> osp(new char[1024], std::default_delete<char>());
// load the data into your buffer at osp.get()
// Find the offset in the data by parsing
auto const offset = parse_buffer_for_offset(osp.get());
// Now set a new offset into the data
std::shared_ptr<char> nsp(osp, osp.get() + offset);
Now nsp.get()
returns the offset address but the original array will get deleted properly.
Note: The offset is a property of each shared_ptr
so if you copy the shared_ptr
nsp
you get another shared_ptr
with the same offset. This works whether you construct a new copy or assign a copy to an existing shared_ptr
.
This means you can have different shared_ptr
with different offsets that all manage the same, underlying resource which will only be cleaned up after all shared_ptr
are destroyed.
To see this in operation consider the following code:
std::shared_ptr<char> original_sp(new char[1024], std::default_delete<char>());
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_100_sp1(original_sp, original_sp.get() + 100);
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_100_sp2 = offset_100_sp1;
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_200_sp1(original_sp, original_sp.get() + 200);
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_200_sp2 = offset_200_sp1;
std::cout << "nPointers managing the array: " << original_sp.use_count() << 'n';
std::cout << "nOffset 100 pointers:" << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_100_sp1.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_100_sp2.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << "nOffset 200 pointers:" << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_200_sp1.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_200_sp2.get()) << 'n';
Output:
Pointers managing the array: 5
Offset 100 pointers:
100
100
Offset 200 pointers:
200
200
1
Yes this is exactly what the aliasing constructor is for!
– n.m.
9 hours ago
Of course, while this shares ownership with theshared_ptr
used during creation (and all its clones), the offset is not applied to any of the existing clones. So it's not clear to meet whether this meets the question's stated goal of "setting" the shared_ptr
– Ben Voigt
2 hours ago
@BenVoigt I have made a note to the effect that the offset belongs to eachshared_ptr
and that offsets are transferred to anothershared_ptr
when copied (either copy constructed or copy assigned).
– Galik
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Yes this is possible. You can use constructor 8
, the aliasing constructor from this reference: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/shared_ptr/shared_ptr
// make sure you use an array deleter
std::shared_ptr<char> osp(new char[1024], std::default_delete<char>());
// load the data into your buffer at osp.get()
// Find the offset in the data by parsing
auto const offset = parse_buffer_for_offset(osp.get());
// Now set a new offset into the data
std::shared_ptr<char> nsp(osp, osp.get() + offset);
Now nsp.get()
returns the offset address but the original array will get deleted properly.
Note: The offset is a property of each shared_ptr
so if you copy the shared_ptr
nsp
you get another shared_ptr
with the same offset. This works whether you construct a new copy or assign a copy to an existing shared_ptr
.
This means you can have different shared_ptr
with different offsets that all manage the same, underlying resource which will only be cleaned up after all shared_ptr
are destroyed.
To see this in operation consider the following code:
std::shared_ptr<char> original_sp(new char[1024], std::default_delete<char>());
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_100_sp1(original_sp, original_sp.get() + 100);
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_100_sp2 = offset_100_sp1;
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_200_sp1(original_sp, original_sp.get() + 200);
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_200_sp2 = offset_200_sp1;
std::cout << "nPointers managing the array: " << original_sp.use_count() << 'n';
std::cout << "nOffset 100 pointers:" << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_100_sp1.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_100_sp2.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << "nOffset 200 pointers:" << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_200_sp1.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_200_sp2.get()) << 'n';
Output:
Pointers managing the array: 5
Offset 100 pointers:
100
100
Offset 200 pointers:
200
200
1
Yes this is exactly what the aliasing constructor is for!
– n.m.
9 hours ago
Of course, while this shares ownership with theshared_ptr
used during creation (and all its clones), the offset is not applied to any of the existing clones. So it's not clear to meet whether this meets the question's stated goal of "setting" the shared_ptr
– Ben Voigt
2 hours ago
@BenVoigt I have made a note to the effect that the offset belongs to eachshared_ptr
and that offsets are transferred to anothershared_ptr
when copied (either copy constructed or copy assigned).
– Galik
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Yes this is possible. You can use constructor 8
, the aliasing constructor from this reference: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/shared_ptr/shared_ptr
// make sure you use an array deleter
std::shared_ptr<char> osp(new char[1024], std::default_delete<char>());
// load the data into your buffer at osp.get()
// Find the offset in the data by parsing
auto const offset = parse_buffer_for_offset(osp.get());
// Now set a new offset into the data
std::shared_ptr<char> nsp(osp, osp.get() + offset);
Now nsp.get()
returns the offset address but the original array will get deleted properly.
Note: The offset is a property of each shared_ptr
so if you copy the shared_ptr
nsp
you get another shared_ptr
with the same offset. This works whether you construct a new copy or assign a copy to an existing shared_ptr
.
This means you can have different shared_ptr
with different offsets that all manage the same, underlying resource which will only be cleaned up after all shared_ptr
are destroyed.
To see this in operation consider the following code:
std::shared_ptr<char> original_sp(new char[1024], std::default_delete<char>());
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_100_sp1(original_sp, original_sp.get() + 100);
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_100_sp2 = offset_100_sp1;
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_200_sp1(original_sp, original_sp.get() + 200);
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_200_sp2 = offset_200_sp1;
std::cout << "nPointers managing the array: " << original_sp.use_count() << 'n';
std::cout << "nOffset 100 pointers:" << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_100_sp1.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_100_sp2.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << "nOffset 200 pointers:" << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_200_sp1.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_200_sp2.get()) << 'n';
Output:
Pointers managing the array: 5
Offset 100 pointers:
100
100
Offset 200 pointers:
200
200
Yes this is possible. You can use constructor 8
, the aliasing constructor from this reference: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/shared_ptr/shared_ptr
// make sure you use an array deleter
std::shared_ptr<char> osp(new char[1024], std::default_delete<char>());
// load the data into your buffer at osp.get()
// Find the offset in the data by parsing
auto const offset = parse_buffer_for_offset(osp.get());
// Now set a new offset into the data
std::shared_ptr<char> nsp(osp, osp.get() + offset);
Now nsp.get()
returns the offset address but the original array will get deleted properly.
Note: The offset is a property of each shared_ptr
so if you copy the shared_ptr
nsp
you get another shared_ptr
with the same offset. This works whether you construct a new copy or assign a copy to an existing shared_ptr
.
This means you can have different shared_ptr
with different offsets that all manage the same, underlying resource which will only be cleaned up after all shared_ptr
are destroyed.
To see this in operation consider the following code:
std::shared_ptr<char> original_sp(new char[1024], std::default_delete<char>());
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_100_sp1(original_sp, original_sp.get() + 100);
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_100_sp2 = offset_100_sp1;
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_200_sp1(original_sp, original_sp.get() + 200);
std::shared_ptr<char> offset_200_sp2 = offset_200_sp1;
std::cout << "nPointers managing the array: " << original_sp.use_count() << 'n';
std::cout << "nOffset 100 pointers:" << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_100_sp1.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_100_sp2.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << "nOffset 200 pointers:" << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_200_sp1.get()) << 'n';
std::cout << std::distance(original_sp.get(), offset_200_sp2.get()) << 'n';
Output:
Pointers managing the array: 5
Offset 100 pointers:
100
100
Offset 200 pointers:
200
200
edited 1 hour ago
answered 9 hours ago
GalikGalik
34.3k34980
34.3k34980
1
Yes this is exactly what the aliasing constructor is for!
– n.m.
9 hours ago
Of course, while this shares ownership with theshared_ptr
used during creation (and all its clones), the offset is not applied to any of the existing clones. So it's not clear to meet whether this meets the question's stated goal of "setting" the shared_ptr
– Ben Voigt
2 hours ago
@BenVoigt I have made a note to the effect that the offset belongs to eachshared_ptr
and that offsets are transferred to anothershared_ptr
when copied (either copy constructed or copy assigned).
– Galik
1 hour ago
add a comment |
1
Yes this is exactly what the aliasing constructor is for!
– n.m.
9 hours ago
Of course, while this shares ownership with theshared_ptr
used during creation (and all its clones), the offset is not applied to any of the existing clones. So it's not clear to meet whether this meets the question's stated goal of "setting" the shared_ptr
– Ben Voigt
2 hours ago
@BenVoigt I have made a note to the effect that the offset belongs to eachshared_ptr
and that offsets are transferred to anothershared_ptr
when copied (either copy constructed or copy assigned).
– Galik
1 hour ago
1
1
Yes this is exactly what the aliasing constructor is for!
– n.m.
9 hours ago
Yes this is exactly what the aliasing constructor is for!
– n.m.
9 hours ago
Of course, while this shares ownership with the
shared_ptr
used during creation (and all its clones), the offset is not applied to any of the existing clones. So it's not clear to meet whether this meets the question's stated goal of "setting" the shared_ptr– Ben Voigt
2 hours ago
Of course, while this shares ownership with the
shared_ptr
used during creation (and all its clones), the offset is not applied to any of the existing clones. So it's not clear to meet whether this meets the question's stated goal of "setting" the shared_ptr– Ben Voigt
2 hours ago
@BenVoigt I have made a note to the effect that the offset belongs to each
shared_ptr
and that offsets are transferred to another shared_ptr
when copied (either copy constructed or copy assigned).– Galik
1 hour ago
@BenVoigt I have made a note to the effect that the offset belongs to each
shared_ptr
and that offsets are transferred to another shared_ptr
when copied (either copy constructed or copy assigned).– Galik
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54737556%2fset-shared-ptr-with-new-pointer-that-is-old-pointer-offset%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
Unfortunately, shared pointers don't work this way, and this cannot be done. You will need to find some other way to accomplish this goal. The short answer is: "no".
– Sam Varshavchik
9 hours ago
3
This sounds like a case where you'd want to pass a raw pointer instead of a
shared_ptr
.– Jeremy Friesner
9 hours ago
^^^ that's what it seems. Or tote around a offset value and base your data-read from
p.get() + header_len
. Trying to change the shared pointerp
itself seems odd here.– WhozCraig
9 hours ago
@JeremyFriesner I know and I will handle this situation, because I coded this shared pointer myself and futhermore I can read from file and parse simultaneously (lied in question). Just was wondering are smart pointers that good for low-level binary work. Thanks for suggestion.
– Alex Larionov
9 hours ago
Use
vector<char>
instead of a raw array.– Ulrich Eckhardt
9 hours ago