Neither of these functions require the use of shared ownership of the
returned pointer. This makes it more difficult to create reference
cycles with, and makes the interface more generic, as std::shared_ptr
instances can be created from a std::unique_ptr, but the vice-versa
isn't possible. This also alters relevant functions to take NCA
arguments by const reference rather than a const reference to a
std::shared_ptr. These functions don't alter the ownership of the memory
used by the NCA instance, so we can make the interface more generic by
not assuming anything about the type of smart pointer the NCA is
contained within and make it the caller's responsibility to ensure the
supplied NCA is valid.
Several classes have a lot of non-trivial members within them, or don't
but likely should have the destructor defaulted in the cpp file for
future-proofing/being more friendly to forward declarations.
Leaving the destructor unspecified allows the compiler to inline the
destruction code all over the place, which is generally undesirable from
a code bloat perspective.
Lioncash