Here's one example, given to me by @jleahy: Suppose you have a collection of tasks, executed asynchronously, and managed by an std::shared_ptr<Task>. You may want to do something with those tasks periodically, so a timer event may traverse a std::vector<std::weak_ptr<Task>> and give the tasks something to do. However, simultaneously a task may have concurrently decided that it is no longer needed and die. The timer can thus check whether the task is still alive by making a shared pointer from the weak pointer and using that shared pointer, provided it isn't null.

我看到std::weak_ptr<T>作为std::shared_ptr<T>的句柄:它允许我 获取std::shared_ptr<T>(如果它仍然存在)，但是它不会扩展它的 一生。在以下几种情况下，这种观点是有用的:

// Some sort of image; very expensive to create.
std::shared_ptr< Texture > texture;

// A Widget should be able to quickly get a handle to a Texture. On the
// other hand, I don't want to keep Textures around just because a widget
// may need it.

struct Widget {
    std::weak_ptr< Texture > texture_handle;
    void render() {
        if (auto texture = texture_handle.get(); texture) {
            // do stuff with texture. Warning: `texture`
            // is now extending the lifetime because it
            // is a std::shared_ptr< Texture >.
        } else {
            // gracefully degrade; there's no texture.
        }
    }
};

另一个重要的场景是打破数据结构中的循环。

// Asking for trouble because a node owns the next node, and the next node owns
// the previous node: memory leak; no destructors automatically called.
struct Node {
    std::shared_ptr< Node > next;
    std::shared_ptr< Node > prev;
};

// Asking for trouble because a parent owns its children and children own their
// parents: memory leak; no destructors automatically called.
struct Node {
    std::shared_ptr< Node > parent;
    std::shared_ptr< Node > left_child;
    std::shared_ptr< Node > right_child;
};

// Better: break dependencies using a std::weak_ptr (but not best way to do it;
// see Herb Sutter's talk).
struct Node {
    std::shared_ptr< Node > next;
    std::weak_ptr< Node > prev;
};

// Better: break dependencies using a std::weak_ptr (but not best way to do it;
// see Herb Sutter's talk).
struct Node {
    std::weak_ptr< Node > parent;
    std::shared_ptr< Node > left_child;
    std::shared_ptr< Node > right_child;
};

赫布·萨特有一篇精彩的演讲，解释了语言的最佳使用 特性(在这种情况下是智能指针)，以确保默认情况下的泄漏自由 (意思是:所有的东西都是通过建设来实现的;你很难搞砸它 )。这是必看的节目。

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。

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。

缓存就是一个很好的例子。

对于最近访问的对象，您希望将它们保存在内存中，因此可以保留一个指向它们的强指针。定期扫描缓存，确定最近没有访问哪些对象。你不需要把它们保存在内存中，所以你去掉强指针。

但是，如果该对象正在使用，而其他一些代码持有指向它的强指针，该怎么办?如果缓存删除了指向该对象的唯一指针，就再也找不到它了。因此，缓存保留了一个弱指针，指向它需要找到的对象，如果它们碰巧留在内存中。

这正是弱指针所做的——它允许你在一个对象仍然在附近时定位它，但如果没有其他东西需要它，它就不会保留它。

Here's one example, given to me by @jleahy: Suppose you have a collection of tasks, executed asynchronously, and managed by an std::shared_ptr<Task>. You may want to do something with those tasks periodically, so a timer event may traverse a std::vector<std::weak_ptr<Task>> and give the tasks something to do. However, simultaneously a task may have concurrently decided that it is no longer needed and die. The timer can thus check whether the task is still alive by making a shared pointer from the weak pointer and using that shared pointer, provided it isn't null.