Isn't it bad if we use unique pointer in this case

Question

Hi

I tried to create a scenario of Chain of responsibility pattern as below:
https://www.sololearn.com/compiler-playground/cBV3c5sLaUWn

Is shared_pointer usage proper? I know it takes more overhead compared to unique pointer but this is the only choice. Right?

If we could have used unique pointer , then
ptrLevel1->setNextApprover(ptrLevel2);
will enforce us to move ptrLevel2.

Now, ptrLevel2 is not valid and cannot set third level approver on this null pointer. Is this correct?
https://code.sololearn.com/cBV3c5sLaUWn/?ref=app

Answer 1

Certainly, in the Chain of Responsibility pattern, using shared_ptr is a suitable choice because it allows multiple handlers to share responsibility for processing requests without ownership issues, which is common in this pattern. Using unique_ptr would restrict you from sharing handlers, making it less appropriate for this scenario.

Answer 2

Thanks