Question Correctly adding a Managed Shared component

So, I've come upon what sounds like a use case for a managed shared component. However, after digging through a lot of documentation, I cannot discern how to correctly add the component.

In my case, I have a managed object, we'll call it MyObject, that multiple (and often many) entities need to point to and are grouped by, so I created MySharedComponent which holds a reference to this type. Querying and/or accessing this data is very rare, so I'm not concerned about the potential performance drawbacks of doing it this way over engineering some trickery to point to this object.

I read through the documentation on both shared and managed components, but it did not specify how to add the component to an entity. So, I dug around and so far I've discovered these:

• EntityManager.AddComponentObject claims to be for Unity Component objects, of which my object is not, and it doesn't sound like it's for shared components anyway
  
• EntityManager.AddComponentData expects an IComponentData, not an ISharedComponentData, and doesn't have reference-type overloads anyway
• EntityManager.AddSharedComponentManaged has no overloads which takes a reference type
• EntityManagerManagedComponentExtensions has no extension which accepts ISharedComponentData

How do I actually add this component to an entity?

 

Seems like you already found it?

EntityManager.AddSharedComponentManaged(entity, yourManagedSharedComponent)

 

Shared components are always structs. Store your class as a field inside the struct to make your shared component managed.

 

AddSharedComponentManaged does not accept reference types, only structs, so that's why I wasn't using it. The documentation says to use a class for managed shared components and I cannot pass a class to this. Confusing still, AddSharedComponent is actually marked as obsolete for me, saying to use the prior instead, even for unmanaged components.

I thought that might work, but wasn't sure if that was actually going to function correctly or was even remotely intended, given that conflicts with what the docs say. However, I think I'll just settle for this unless there's some other more intended way that presents itself. Thanks!

Edit: It would appear I misunderstood the docs and this is actually the intended way to approach this, my bad.