Std::weak_ptr是解决悬浮指针问题的一个很好的方法。通过使用原始指针，不可能知道所引用的数据是否已被释放。相反，通过让std::shared_ptr管理数据，并将std::weak_ptr提供给数据的用户，用户可以通过调用expired()或lock()来检查数据的有效性。

你不能单独用std::shared_ptr这样做，因为所有std::shared_ptr实例共享数据的所有权，这些数据在std::shared_ptr的所有实例被删除之前没有被删除。下面是一个如何使用lock()检查悬浮指针的例子:

#include <iostream>
#include <memory>

int main()
{
    // OLD, problem with dangling pointer
    // PROBLEM: ref will point to undefined data!

    int* ptr = new int(10);
    int* ref = ptr;
    delete ptr;

    // NEW
    // SOLUTION: check expired() or lock() to determine if pointer is valid

    // empty definition
    std::shared_ptr<int> sptr;

    // takes ownership of pointer
    sptr.reset(new int);
    *sptr = 10;

    // get pointer to data without taking ownership
    std::weak_ptr<int> weak1 = sptr;

    // deletes managed object, acquires new pointer
    sptr.reset(new int);
    *sptr = 5;

    // get pointer to new data without taking ownership
    std::weak_ptr<int> weak2 = sptr;

    // weak1 is expired!
    if(auto tmp = weak1.lock())
        std::cout << "weak1 value is " << *tmp << '\n';
    else
        std::cout << "weak1 is expired\n";
    
    // weak2 points to new data (5)
    if(auto tmp = weak2.lock())
        std::cout << "weak2 value is " << *tmp << '\n';
    else
        std::cout << "weak2 is expired\n";
}

输出

weak1 is expired
weak2 value is 5

除了其他已经提到的有效用例，std::weak_ptr在多线程环境中是一个很棒的工具，因为

它不拥有对象，因此不能妨碍在不同线程中删除 Std::shared_ptr与Std::weak_ptr结合在一起对悬空指针是安全的——与Std::unique_ptr与原始指针结合在一起相反 std::weak_ptr::lock()是一个原子操作(参见关于weak_ptr的线程安全)

考虑一个任务，将一个目录(~10.000)的所有图像同时加载到内存中(例如作为缩略图缓存)。显然，做到这一点的最佳方法是一个控制线程(处理和管理图像)和多个工作线程(加载图像)。这是一个简单的任务。这里是一个非常简化的实现(join()等被省略了，线程将不得不在一个真正的实现中被不同地处理等)

// a simplified class to hold the thumbnail and data
struct ImageData {
  std::string path;
  std::unique_ptr<YourFavoriteImageLibData> image;
};

// a simplified reader fn
void read( std::vector<std::shared_ptr<ImageData>> imagesToLoad ) {
   for( auto& imageData : imagesToLoad )
     imageData->image = YourFavoriteImageLib::load( imageData->path );
}

// a simplified manager
class Manager {
   std::vector<std::shared_ptr<ImageData>> m_imageDatas;
   std::vector<std::unique_ptr<std::thread>> m_threads;
public:
   void load( const std::string& folderPath ) {
      std::vector<std::string> imagePaths = readFolder( folderPath );
      m_imageDatas = createImageDatas( imagePaths );
      const unsigned numThreads = std::thread::hardware_concurrency();
      std::vector<std::vector<std::shared_ptr<ImageData>>> splitDatas = 
        splitImageDatas( m_imageDatas, numThreads );
      for( auto& dataRangeToLoad : splitDatas )
        m_threads.push_back( std::make_unique<std::thread>(read, dataRangeToLoad) );
   }
};

但是，如果你想中断图像的加载，例如，因为用户选择了一个不同的目录，它会变得复杂得多。或者即使你想毁掉经理。

在更改m_imageDatas字段之前，您需要线程通信并必须停止所有加载器线程。否则，加载器将继续加载，直到所有图像都完成—即使它们已经过时。在简化的示例中，这不会太难，但在实际环境中，事情可能要复杂得多。

The threads would probably be part of a thread pool used by multiple managers, of which some are being stopped, and some aren't etc. The simple parameter imagesToLoad would be a locked queue, into which those managers push their image requests from different control threads with the readers popping the requests - in an arbitrary order - at the other end. And so the communication becomes difficult, slow and error-prone. A very elegant way to avoid any additional communication in such cases is to use std::shared_ptr in conjunction with std::weak_ptr.

// a simplified reader fn
void read( std::vector<std::weak_ptr<ImageData>> imagesToLoad ) {
   for( auto& imageDataWeak : imagesToLoad ) {
     std::shared_ptr<ImageData> imageData = imageDataWeak.lock();
     if( !imageData )
        continue;
     imageData->image = YourFavoriteImageLib::load( imageData->path );
   }
}

// a simplified manager
class Manager {
   std::vector<std::shared_ptr<ImageData>> m_imageDatas;
   std::vector<std::unique_ptr<std::thread>> m_threads;
public:
   void load( const std::string& folderPath ) {
      std::vector<std::string> imagePaths = readFolder( folderPath );
      m_imageDatas = createImageDatas( imagePaths );
      const unsigned numThreads = std::thread::hardware_concurrency();
      std::vector<std::vector<std::weak_ptr<ImageData>>> splitDatas = 
        splitImageDatasToWeak( m_imageDatas, numThreads );
      for( auto& dataRangeToLoad : splitDatas )
        m_threads.push_back( std::make_unique<std::thread>(read, dataRangeToLoad) );
   }
};

此实现几乎与第一个实现一样简单，不需要任何额外的线程通信，并且可以在实际实现中作为线程池/队列的一部分。由于过期的图像被跳过，而未过期的图像被处理，因此在正常操作期间线程永远不必停止。 你总是可以安全地更改路径或销毁你的管理器，因为读取器fn检查，如果拥有的指针没有过期。

在使用指针时，重要的是要了解可用的不同类型的指针，以及何时使用每种指针是有意义的。指针分为以下两类:

原始指针: 原始指针[即SomeClass* ptrToSomeClass = new SomeClass();］ 智能指针: 唯一指针[即std::unique_ptr<SomeClass> uniquePtrToSomeClass (new SomeClass());］ 共享指针[即std::shared_ptr<SomeClass> sharedPtrToSomeClass (new SomeClass());］ 弱指针[即std::weak_ptr<SomeClass> weakPtrToSomeWeakOrSharedPtr (weakOrSharedPtr);］

Raw pointers (sometimes referred to as "legacy pointers", or "C pointers") provide 'bare-bones' pointer behavior and are a common source of bugs and memory leaks. Raw pointers provide no means for keeping track of ownership of the resource and developers must call 'delete' manually to ensure they are not creating a memory leak. This becomes difficult if the resource is shared as it can be challenging to know whether any objects are still pointing to the resource. For these reasons, raw pointers should generally be avoided and only used in performance-critical sections of the code with limited scope.

Unique pointers are a basic smart pointer that 'owns' the underlying raw pointer to the resource and is responsible for calling delete and freeing the allocated memory once the object that 'owns' the unique pointer goes out of scope. The name 'unique' refers to the fact that only one object may 'own' the unique pointer at a given point in time. Ownership may be transferred to another object via the move command, but a unique pointer can never be copied or shared. For these reasons, unique pointers are a good alternative to raw pointers in the case that only one object needs the pointer at a given time, and this alleviates the developer from the need to free memory at the end of the owning object's lifecycle.

Shared pointers are another type of smart pointer that are similar to unique pointers, but allow for many objects to have ownership over the shared pointer. Like unique pointer, shared pointers are responsible for freeing the allocated memory once all objects are done pointing to the resource. It accomplishes this with a technique called reference counting. Each time a new object takes ownership of the shared pointer the reference count is incremented by one. Similarly, when an object goes out of scope or stops pointing to the resource, the reference count is decremented by one. When the reference count reaches zero, the allocated memory is freed. For these reasons, shared pointers are a very powerful type of smart pointer that should be used anytime multiple objects need to point to the same resource.

最后，弱指针是另一种类型的智能指针，它们不是直接指向资源，而是指向另一个指针(弱指针或共享指针)。弱指针不能直接访问对象，但它们可以判断对象是否仍然存在或是否已经过期。弱指针可以临时转换为共享指针以访问所指向的对象(前提是它仍然存在)。为了说明这一点，考虑下面的例子:

您很忙，会议A和会议B有重叠 你决定去开会A，而你的同事去开会B 你告诉你的同事，如果A会议结束后B会议还在进行，你也会加入 可能会出现以下两种情况: 会议A结束了，会议B还在进行，所以你加入了 会议A已经结束，会议B也已经结束，您不能加入

在本例中，您有一个指向会议B的弱指针。您不是会议B的“所有者”，因此会议B可以在没有您的情况下结束，并且您不知道它是否结束，除非您检查。如果它还没有结束，你可以加入和参与，否则，你不能。这与拥有一个指向会议B的共享指针不同，因为您将同时成为会议a和会议B的“所有者”(同时参与这两个会议)。

The example illustrates how a weak pointer works and is useful when an object needs to be an outside observer, but does not want the responsibility of sharing ownership. This is particularly useful in the scenario that two objects need to point to each other (a.k.a. a circular reference). With shared pointers, neither object can be released because they are still 'strongly' pointed to by the other object. When one of the pointers is a weak pointer, the object holding the weak pointer can still access the other object when needed, provided it still exists.

它们在Boost中很有用。当调用异步处理程序时，不能保证目标对象仍然存在。诀窍是使用std::bind或lambda capture将weak_ptr绑定到异步处理程序对象中。

void MyClass::startTimer()
{
    std::weak_ptr<MyClass> weak = shared_from_this();
    timer_.async_wait( [weak](const boost::system::error_code& ec)
    {
        auto self = weak.lock();
        if (self)
        {
            self->handleTimeout();
        }
        else
        {
            std::cout << "Target object no longer exists!\n";
        }
    } );
}

这是在Boost中经常看到的self = shared_from_this()习惯用法的变体。Asio示例，其中挂起的异步处理程序不会延长目标对象的生命周期，但如果目标对象被删除，则仍然是安全的。

当我们不想拥有对象时:

Ex:

class A
{
    shared_ptr<int> sPtr1;
    weak_ptr<int> wPtr1;
}

在上面的类中，wPtr1并不拥有wPtr1所指向的资源。如果资源被删除，那么wPtr1将过期。

避免循环依赖:

shard_ptr<A> <----| shared_ptr<B> <------
    ^             |          ^          |
    |             |          |          |
    |             |          |          |
    |             |          |          |
    |             |          |          |
class A           |     class B         |
    |             |          |          |
    |             ------------          |
    |                                   |
    -------------------------------------

现在如果我们创建类B和A的shared_ptr, both指针的use_count是2。

当shared_ptr超出作用域时，计数仍然保持1，因此A和B对象不会被删除。

class B;

class A
{
    shared_ptr<B> sP1; // use weak_ptr instead to avoid CD

public:
    A() {  cout << "A()" << endl; }
    ~A() { cout << "~A()" << endl; }

    void setShared(shared_ptr<B>& p)
    {
        sP1 = p;
    }
};

class B
{
    shared_ptr<A> sP1;

public:
    B() {  cout << "B()" << endl; }
    ~B() { cout << "~B()" << endl; }

    void setShared(shared_ptr<A>& p)
    {
        sP1 = p;
    }
};

int main()
{
    shared_ptr<A> aPtr(new A);
    shared_ptr<B> bPtr(new B);

    aPtr->setShared(bPtr);
    bPtr->setShared(aPtr);

    return 0;  
}

输出:

A()
B()

正如我们从输出中看到的，A和B指针永远不会被删除，从而导致内存泄漏。

为了避免这样的问题，只需在类A中使用weak_ptr而不是shared_ptr，这更有意义。

Std::weak_ptr是解决悬浮指针问题的一个很好的方法。通过使用原始指针，不可能知道所引用的数据是否已被释放。相反，通过让std::shared_ptr管理数据，并将std::weak_ptr提供给数据的用户，用户可以通过调用expired()或lock()来检查数据的有效性。

你不能单独用std::shared_ptr这样做，因为所有std::shared_ptr实例共享数据的所有权，这些数据在std::shared_ptr的所有实例被删除之前没有被删除。下面是一个如何使用lock()检查悬浮指针的例子:

#include <iostream>
#include <memory>

int main()
{
    // OLD, problem with dangling pointer
    // PROBLEM: ref will point to undefined data!

    int* ptr = new int(10);
    int* ref = ptr;
    delete ptr;

    // NEW
    // SOLUTION: check expired() or lock() to determine if pointer is valid

    // empty definition
    std::shared_ptr<int> sptr;

    // takes ownership of pointer
    sptr.reset(new int);
    *sptr = 10;

    // get pointer to data without taking ownership
    std::weak_ptr<int> weak1 = sptr;

    // deletes managed object, acquires new pointer
    sptr.reset(new int);
    *sptr = 5;

    // get pointer to new data without taking ownership
    std::weak_ptr<int> weak2 = sptr;

    // weak1 is expired!
    if(auto tmp = weak1.lock())
        std::cout << "weak1 value is " << *tmp << '\n';
    else
        std::cout << "weak1 is expired\n";
    
    // weak2 points to new data (5)
    if(auto tmp = weak2.lock())
        std::cout << "weak2 value is " << *tmp << '\n';
    else
        std::cout << "weak2 is expired\n";
}

输出

weak1 is expired
weak2 value is 5