I've being reading the list of library changes proposed for C++23 and I'm quite curious about the std::out_ptr
and std::inout_ptr
(their _t
siblings). As far as I understand they are some kind of wrapper for smart pointers to be compatible with raw pointers, but I haven't managed to understand them yet. Maybe someone here is familiar with the proposal or may give a less ISO-like explanation or examples?

- 10,847
- 9
- 53
- 93
-
4I guess the best description you will get is from the [proposal](http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2021/p1132r8.html) itself. – Timo Aug 25 '21 at 07:18
-
purpose is to use them for C-API which take/set owning pointer (`void foo(SomeType**)` whereas we would expect `std::unique_ptr
foo()` C++-API). – Jarod42 Aug 25 '21 at 07:28 -
Also cppreference already contains some text regarding [`std::out_ptr_t`](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/out_ptr_t) and [`std::inout_ptr_t`](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/inout_ptr_t) (the latter is a bit more elaborate and contains an example) – andreee Aug 25 '21 at 07:39
1 Answers
TL;DR - it is for simpler and more seemless interoperability between C out/inout pointer parameters and smart pointers
Longer answer
Let's separate the stuff. std::out_ptr
and std::inout_ptr
are functions used to create objects of type std::out_ptr_t
and std::inout_ptr_t
respectively. What are those types and functions for? Let's look at an example inspired by this (for simplicity I replaced generic argument with good ol' int
):
int foreign_resetter(int**);
auto up = std::make_unique<int>(5);
if (int ec = foreign_resetter(std::inout_ptr(up)) {
return ec;
}
As you see std::inout_ptr_t
created with std::inout_ptr
is passed to function taking pointer to pointer to the template argument of std::unique_ptr
. Before adding std::inout_ptr_t
interoperation with old C in-out pointer parameters was much more cumbersome and error prone. It would look more less like this:
int foreign_resetter(int**);
auto up = std::make_unique<int>(5);
int* up_raw = up.release();
if (int ec = foreign_resetter(&up_raw)) {
return ec;
}
up.reset(up_raw);
Differences out_ptr
vs inout_ptr
From the proposal P1132:
inout_ptr's semantics are exactly like out_ptr's, just with the additional requirement that it calls .release() on the smart pointer upon constructing the temporary inout_ptr_t.
This is because the foreign_resetter
might delete a pointer before setting a new one, calling .release()
reserves that behavior and can be safer. Use inout_ptr
if your pointer is already valid and allocated, and out_ptr
if the smart pointer is empty.
-
can you also mention what's the difference between `out_ptr` and `inout_ptr`? – fen Mar 22 '23 at 11:57
-
Your cumbersome version is buggy. You leak the object in case of an error. But that's actually easy to fix. The bigger problem is the `inout_ptr` version - it's actually more error-prone, since C APIs often don't guarantee the output is valid in case of an error. So you could end up with a garbage pointer in that case. – user541686 Mar 22 '23 at 14:12