auto_ptr ? (was Re: I'm back)

["Peter Burns" <pburns@firstdata.com.au>]

>>Christian Reiniger writes:
> > PS: GCC 2.95 is out! Hoooray!
>Agreeeeeed.  Now I have to be bothered downloading it.

>* How well is RTTI supported by Win32 compilers? AFAIK gcc 2.95 doesn't
>have problems with it (and some little tests have been positive here),
>but if it opens up portability problems we should ban it for now.

What about auto_ptr? I keep reading that if you use exceptions, then you
probably should be using auto_ptr to prevent resource leaks. I remember
seeing
auto_ptr commented out in the last <memory> header I saw for linux. The
comments
around it said this had been done because  it hadn't been properly
standardised.

Does anybody know if it has been standardised? It would be nice to be able
to use it.
Since some versions of the STL may not have it perhaps it would be good to
include
an implementation of it in our distribution.

Has anybody had any experience using auto_ptr? Is it worth using? Is there
any thing different in using
an auto_ptr compared to a normal pointer?

Peter Burns