title: Should I switch from using boost::shared_ptr to std::shared_ptr?
body: <p>I would like to enable support for C++0x in GCC with <code>-std=c++0x</code>. I don't absolutely necessarily need any of the <a href="http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html" rel="noreferrer">currently supported C++11 features</a> in GCC 4.5 (and soon 4.6), but I would like to start getting used to them. For example, in a few places where I use iterators, an <code>auto</code> type would be useful.</p>
  
  <p>But again, I don't <strong>need</strong> any of the currently supported features. The goal here is to encourage me to incorporate the features of the new standard into my programming "vocabulary". </p>
  
  <p>From what you know of the C++11 support, is it a good idea to enable it in GCC, and then embrace it by, for example, switching from using <code>boost::shared_ptr</code> to <code>std::shared_ptr</code> exclusively as the two don't mix?</p>
  
  <p>PS: I'm aware of <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1086798/differences-between-different-flavours-of-shared-ptr">this good question</a> which compares the different flavors of <code>shared_ptr</code> but I'm asking a higher level advice on which to use before the standard is finalized. Another way of putting that is, when a compiler like GCC says it supports an "experimental feature", does that mean I am likely to encounter weird errors during compilation that will be major time sinks and a source of cryptic questions on StackOverflow?</p>
  
  <p><strong>Edit</strong>: I decided to switch back from <code>std::shared_ptr</code> because I just don't trust its support in GCC 4.5 as <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/q/6322364/627517">shown by example in this question</a>.</p>