I have a situation where I have a shared_ptr to base of a child class. When the shared_ptr goes to delete the pointer, only the parent destructor is being called.
This question follows on from How to pass by lambda in C++0x?, but perhaps this is a clearer way to ask the question.
I\'m adding a bit amount of tracing and debugging code into a class that I\'m refactoring. I have a Trace object which has some filtering properties and methods bool CanTrace(Level, , TracePropertyLi
For example, stdlibc++ has the following: unique_lock& operator=(unique_lock&& __u) { if(_M_owns)
I suspect the following chaining of functions would result in unspecified sequence according to the C++ standards (assume C++0x). Just want a confirmation and if anyone could provide an explanation, I
I have a class similar to the following: class开发者_StackOverflow SomeClass { public: template<typename... Args>
Can atomic variables in c++0x be initialized globally? For e.g. atomic_int turnX = 5; i开发者_开发百科nt main(){
Referring to a (slightly dated) paper by Hans Boehm, under \"Atomic Operations\". It mentions that the memory model (proposed at the time) would not prevent an optimizing compiler from combining a seq
A point from n3290 ISO draft: Lambda expressions : section 5.1.2, para 6: \"The closure type for a lambda-expression with no
开发者_StackOverflow As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references,or expertise, but this question will like
加载中,请稍侯......