Exploring std::shared_ptr

(1979 words)

Today we’ll talk about C++’s built-in smart pointer std::shared_ptr . If you have not yet read my previous post about std::unique_ptr I would highly recommend doing so before continuing.

std::shared_ptr

shared_ptr is another C++11 managed pointer. Like unique_ptr , it also saves you the need to call new and delete (and to generally worry about forgetting to release etc).

Unlike unique_ptr , shared_ptr can be shared. This means that multiple instances of shared_ptr<T> pointing to the same instance of T can co-exist. This is achieved via reference counting in a control block that’s shared by all shared_ptr s pointing to the same object. When the last shared_ptr pointing to an instance of T is released, T is released as well.

Releasing a shared_ptr can be done in the following ways:

Most commonly: via going out of scope, meaning calling the destructor automatically;

Through assignment of another shared_ptr ;

; Through calling reset() (more on this later).

Let’s look at an example:

#include <iostream> #include <memory> struct Snitch { public: Snitch() { std::cout << "c'tor" << std::endl; } ~Snitch() { std::cout << "d'tor" << std::endl; } Snitch(Snitch const&) { std::cout << "copy c'tor" << std::endl; } Snitch(Snitch&&) { std::cout << "move c'tor" << std::endl; } }; int main() { auto snitch = std::make_shared<Snitch>(); auto another_snitch = snitch; std::cout << "Equal?: " << (snitch == another_snitch) << std::endl; { auto scoped_snitch = snitch; auto another_scoped_snitch = scoped_snitch; } // destroy 'another_scoped_snitch' and 'scoped_snitch' } // destroy 'snother_snitch' and 'snitch'

Output:

c'tor Equal?: 1 d'tor

Note that only 1 instance of Snitch is ever created, and that no copy/move constructors are used. All of snitch , another_snitch , scoped_snitch and another_scoped_snitch are equal. Also note that snitch has the type shared_ptr<Snitch> , as this is make_shared() ’s return type:

std::is_same<decltype(snitch), std::shared_ptr<Snitch>>::value == true

We’ll go into make_shared soon.

Performance & thread safety

unique_ptr has performance similar to a raw pointer (with compiler optimizations), and also the size of a raw pointer. This is not the case for shared_ptr .

shared_ptr must have at least 2 pointers, so it’s bigger than a raw pointer. It also guarantees thread-safety for all methods as long as each thread has its own copy. Thread safety includes assigment, reference increment / decrement and all other operations. However, it does not mean that locks are acquired prior to calling any of T ’s methods - only shared_ptr ’s own methods are guaranteed to be thread-safe. In other words, if you want T to be used from multiple thread concurrently you will have to implement thread-safety yourself.

As always, thread safety comes at a price – performance. For most cases it would probably be minimal, by utilizing atomic operations, but it’s not guaranteed to be atomic and even atomics are not free.

If you’d like to read more on performance of C++ smart pointers vs raw pointers check out this cool post by Davide Coppola.

std::make_shared()

Much like make_unique() , make_shared() saves us from using new directly, arguably prodoces cleaner code, and is exception safe. In addition to all of these, and unlike make_unique() , it also brings a performance advantage.

Performance? Yes, performance. shared_ptr<T> manages a reference count to know when to release T . This is done via a shared control block to which all shared_ptr s point. Therefore, it must be dynamically allocated. And of course there’s also the object itself, T , which needs to be dynamically allocated as well.

So creating a new shared_ptr would create 2 objects, thus call new twice. However, make_shared() can make a single allocation for both, and thus save some load. Cool, right?

It’s good to know that:

This can’t possibly be done through shared_ptr ’s constructor, as the constructor is called on an already allocated memory block and there’s no realloc() equivalent in C++. You may use std::allocate_shared() if you need a custom allocator.

Construct from unique_ptr

shared_ptr has a special constructor that accepts a unique_ptr&& . This is useful when working with factories that return a unique_ptr , but you want to assign the value to a shared_ptr :

std::unique_ptr<MyObject> CreateMyObject() { return std::make_unique<MyObject>(); } int main() { std::shared_ptr<MyObject> shared_object = CreateMyObject(); }

If you’re implementing a factory and don’t know if your callers will assign the value to a unique_ptr or a shared_ptr - always return unique_ptr .

No release() method, reset() doesn’t necessarily release

Unlike unique_ptr , shared_ptr does not have a release() method. It wouldn’t make sense to implement such a method since there’s oftentimes no way to determine at compile time how many shared_ptr s point to the same instance.

On the other hand, reset() exists, but it does not necessarily delete the underlying object. Here’s an example:

#include <iostream> #include <type_traits> #include <memory> struct Snitch { // Same as above, no changes public: Snitch() { std::cout << "c'tor" << std::endl; } ~Snitch() { std::cout << "d'tor" << std::endl; } Snitch(Snitch const&) { std::cout << "copy c'tor" << std::endl; } Snitch(Snitch&&) { std::cout << "move c'tor" << std::endl; } }; int main() { std::cout << "Creating 1st Snitch" << std::endl; auto snitch1 = std::make_shared<Snitch>(); auto snitch2 = snitch1; std::cout << "Calling reset" << std::endl; snitch1.reset(); // object will *not* be released std::cout << "Moving out of scope" << std::endl; }

Output:

Creating 1st Snitch c'tor Calling reset Moving out of scope d'tor

Cyclic references & std::weak_ptr

shared_ptr s are almost perfect. Their one imperfection is that they don’t support cycles. Example:

#include <iostream> #include <type_traits> #include <memory> struct Node { // Binary tree Node() { std::cout << "c'tor" << std::endl; } ~Node() { std::cout << "d'tor" << std::endl; } std::shared_ptr<Node> parent; std::shared_ptr<Node> left; std::shared_ptr<Node> right; }; int main() { auto root = std::make_shared<Node>(); root->left = std::make_shared<Node>(); root->left->parent = root; }

Output:

c'tor c'tor

As you can see, no destructor has been called due to the vicious cycle I introduced, thus a memory leak occurred.

weak_ptr was created to allow us to have cycles that won’t leak. A weak_ptr holds a non-owning pointer. Essentially it means that weak_ptr won’t prevent its pointee from being released.

In the above example, simply modifying the parent declaration from

std::shared_ptr<Node> parent;

To:

std::weak_ptr<Node> parent;

Without changing anything else in the code, and we get the following output:

c'tor c'tor d'tor d'tor

Magic, right? That’s cool, however there are a few things we should know. The most important is that the object pointed by the weak_ptr can be released while the weak_ptr is still alive. That’s pretty much the definition of a weak pointer.

Another thing is that weak_ptr has a very basic API, which does not even include a get() method. WAT? Yes. But, of course, it’s not useless. In order to use the object pointed to by a weak_ptr one must upgrade it to a shared_ptr by calling lock() and checking if the returned shared_ptr is empty:

std::weak_ptr<std::string> weak = // ... std::shared_ptr<std::string> shared = weak.lock(); if (shared) { // object exists } else { // object has been released }

Once we have a shared_ptr in our hands the object no longer can be released, so that’s a pretty smart and cool design decision.

One caveat of using weak_ptr is that while the object is released after the last shared_ptr is released, the control block remains alive until the last weak_ptr is released. If the control block and object are allocated together (see make_shared above) – this would mean that weak_ptr will cause the memory to remain alive (even though the object will be destroyed).

Control block

As previously mentioned, shared_ptr s are managed via a control block. These control blocks are up to the implementations to define, however they generally contain the following:

The managed object (either a pointer or the object itself if created via make_unique() );

); Reference count (for both other shared_ptr s and weak_ptr s);

s and s); Deletion function.

The control block is always accessed in a thread-safe way, either via atomics or a mutex.

Earlier I wrote that a shared_ptr has the size of 2 pointers, while here I descrive the control block as pointing to (or containing) the object. So what does shared_ptr need to point to, other than the control block? Read the next section to find out :)

Point to A , manage B

This may sound somewhat bizarre at first, so bear with me. Say you have an internal object, B . This B has a few fields, but one of them, A , is exposed externally. One possible such scenario is where B is a channel to a database including the internal socket etc, and A is the API object on which a user acts. Usually you would have these as private members, or hide them behind an interface. But, again, bear with me – suppose you have a good reason.

Now, you want to manage B in a shared way, but you only want to give users A what do you do? It turns out shared_ptr supports this via a feature called aliasing.

With aliasing one can create a shared_ptr from another shared_ptr , so that their control blocks are the same, but have the get() method return any arbitrary pointer, even one that has nothing to do with them.

Here’s an example:

struct DatabaseConnection {}; // exposed to the user struct InternalDatabaseConnection { // socket // authentication information DatabaseConnection connection; }; std::shared_ptr<DatabaseConnection> CreateDatabaseConnection() { auto tmp = std::make_shared<InternalDatabaseConnection>(); return std::shared_ptr<DatabaseConnection>(tmp, &tmp->connection); }

Note that delete will never be called on &tmp->connection which is a DatabaseConnection , but rather only on InternalDatabaseConnection allocated by make_shared .

Casting

Like unique_ptr , shared_ptr also supports automatic cast from shared_ptr<T> to shared_ptr<U> if T* is convertible to U* .

Unlike unique_ptr , shared_ptr will always call the destructor it was constructed with, even when casting to a parent with no virtual destructor. Example:

#include <iostream> #include <memory> struct Base { ~Base() { std::cout << "non-virtual ~Base()" << std::endl; } }; struct Derived : Base { ~Derived() { std::cout << "~Derived()" << std::endl; } }; int main() { std::shared_ptr<Base> base = std::make_shared<Derived>(); }

Output:

~Derived() non-virtual ~Base()

If we were to replace shared_ptr with unique_ptr (and make_shared with make_unique ) the program would not call ~Derived .

In addition to that, there are 4 utility functions to allow creating a shared_ptr when implicit conversion doesn’t happen:

std::static_pointer_cast

std::dynamic_pointer_cast

std::const_pointer_cast

std::reinterpret_pointer_cast

Let’s look at an example:

auto derived = std::make_shared<Derived>(); std::shared_ptr<Base> base = derived; // OK. //std::shared_ptr<Derived> derived2 = base; // ERROR: no implicit down-cast. std::shared_ptr<Derived> derived2 = std::static_pointer_cast<Derived>(base); std::shared_ptr<Derived> derived3 = std::dynamic_pointer_cast<Derived>(base);

Note that T* needs to be convertible to U* , which is different from T being convertible to U :

auto shared_short = std::make_shared<short>(123); //std::shared_ptr<int> shared_int = shared_short; // ERROR: no cast from short* to int*.

std::enable_shared_from_this

This is somewhat odd and very specific, so one last time I need you to bear with me;

Suppose you’re implementing a class WeirdClass . And suppose you know that this class will be managed by shared_ptr . And suppose that for some reason you would like to return a shared_ptr to yourself (yourself being an instance of WeirdClass ). How would you do that? Let’s consider the following:

#include <iostream> #include <memory> struct WeirdClass { std::shared_ptr<WeirdClass> CreateSharedPtrToThis() { return std::shared_ptr<WeirdClass>(this); // DON'T DO THIS. } }; int main() { auto weird_class = std::make_shared<WeirdClass>(); auto tmp = weird_class->CreateSharedPtrToThis(); } // ERROR: double delete

This kind of error can generally be avoided by not calling shared_ptr ’s constructor directly, but std::make_shared instead.

However, in this specific case the object is already allocated - we merely want to copy a shared_ptr that already exists, but is unknown in the context of WeirdClass . What do we do? This is exactly why std::enable_shared_from_this was invented:

#include <iostream> #include <memory> struct WeirdClass : std::enable_shared_from_this<WeirdClass> { std::shared_ptr<WeirdClass> CreateSharedPtrToThis() { return shared_from_this(); } }; int main() { auto weird_class = std::make_shared<WeirdClass>(); auto tmp = weird_class->CreateSharedPtrToThis(); } // no problem!

But please, don’t take this as a reason to use enable_shared_from_this . Some features are best not used :)

That’s it for today

I hope you found this post useful. Please let me know if I missed anything, have an error somewhere, or if you have any question!