Introduce owning_ptr<T>; use it for JPEG2KEncode and JPEG2KDecode.

owning_ptr<T> adapts std::unique_ptr<T> to be a better drop-in replacement for
a legacy class that formerly stored plain T* data members, and explicitly
destroyed them using domain-specific destructor functions.

Directly substituting std::unique_ptr into JPEG2KEncode and JPEG2KDecode was
cumbersome because every such pointer declaration required a redundant
template parameter describing the deleter function passed into its
constructor. Moreover, it required lots of little syntax tweaks: changing
every assignment to a reset() call, changing every reference to a get() call.

Using owning_ptr<T> allows us to leave the code more or less as it was before,
save that assignment and destruction automatically handle the previous
referenced T instance.

1 files changed, 71 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/indra/llcommon/owning_ptr.h b/indra/llcommon/owning_ptr.h
new file mode 100755
index 0000000000..c0da245265
--- /dev/null
+++ b/indra/llcommon/owning_ptr.h
@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+/**
+ * @file   owning_ptr.h
+ * @author Nat Goodspeed
+ * @date   2024-09-27
+ * @brief  owning_ptr<T> is like std::unique_ptr<T>, but easier to integrate
+ *
+ * $LicenseInfo:firstyear=2024&license=viewerlgpl$
+ * Copyright (c) 2024, Linden Research, Inc.
+ * $/LicenseInfo$
+ */
+
+#if ! defined(LL_OWNING_PTR_H)
+#define LL_OWNING_PTR_H
+
+#include <functional>
+#include <memory>
+
+/**
+ * owning_ptr<T> adapts std::unique_ptr<T> to make it easier to adopt into
+ * older code using dumb pointers.
+ *
+ * Consider a class Outer with a member Thing* mThing. After the constructor,
+ * each time a method wants to assign to mThing, it must test for nullptr and
+ * destroy the previous Thing instance. During Outer's lifetime, mThing is
+ * passed to legacy domain-specific functions accepting plain Thing*. Finally
+ * the destructor must again test for nullptr and destroy the remaining Thing
+ * instance.
+ *
+ * Multiply that by several different Outer members of different types,
+ * possibly with different domain-specific destructor functions.
+ *
+ * Dropping std::unique_ptr<Thing> into Outer is cumbersome for a several
+ * reasons. First, if Thing requires a domain-specific destructor function,
+ * the unique_ptr declaration of mThing must explicitly state the type of that
+ * function (as a function pointer, for a typical legacy function). Second,
+ * every Thing* assignment to mThing must be changed to mThing.reset(). Third,
+ * every time we call a legacy domain-specific function, we must pass
+ * mThing.get().
+ *
+ * owning_ptr<T> is designed to drop into a situation like this. The domain-
+ * specific destructor function, if any, is passed to its constructor; it need
+ * not be encoded into the pointer type. owning_ptr<T> supports plain pointer
+ * assignment, internally calling std::unique_ptr<T>::reset(). It also
+ * supports implicit conversion to plain T*, to pass the owned pointer to
+ * legacy domain-specific functions.
+ *
+ * Obviously owning_ptr<T> must not be used in situations where ownership of
+ * the referenced object is passed on to another pointer: use std::unique_ptr
+ * for that. Similarly, it is not for shared ownership. It simplifies lifetime
+ * management for classes that currently store (and explicitly destroy) plain
+ * T* pointers.
+ */
+template <typename T>
+class owning_ptr
+{
+    using deleter = std::function<void(T*)>;
+public:
+    owning_ptr(T* p=nullptr, const deleter& d=std::default_delete<T>()):
+        mPtr(p, d)
+    {}
+    void reset(T* p=nullptr) { mPtr.reset(p); }
+    owning_ptr& operator=(T* p) { mPtr.reset(p); return *this; }
+    operator T*() const { return mPtr.get(); }
+    T& operator*() const { return *mPtr; }
+    T* operator->() const { return mPtr.operator->(); }
+
+private:
+    std::unique_ptr<T, std::function<void(T*)>> mPtr;
+};
+
+#endif /* ! defined(LL_OWNING_PTR_H) */