For the below code, when v is copied, the members of Model class do not get copied. #include <boost/ptr_container/ptr_vector.hpp>
I\'m fighting the following proposal now, and I want to know legal and for lesser extent moral arguments against it or for it.
I am having problem in writing copy constructor for pointers to objects. This is my exact problem I have a class G1 that has an object s1 as its private data member. This is an object of a struct.
If I override operator= will the copy constructor automatically use the new operator? Similarly, if I define a copy constructo开发者_高级运维r, will operator= automatically \'inherit\' the behavior fr
I currently have a vector using my template as its type: vector<hashData> myTable; hashData is a class:
Some background: I\'m writing a policy-based smart pointer (like SmartPtr in the Loki library), which can have destructive copy semantics like auto_ptr. Therefore, it needs to have a template copy con
Is the compiler allowed to eliminate the copy that is required for the by-value capture? vector<Image> movie1;
While learning the concept of \"copying members\", the book gives the following statement. In addition, a default assignment cannot be generated if a nonstatic member is a reference, a const,or a us
What happens (exactly) if you leave out the copy开发者_如何学编程-constructor in a C++ class?
This question already has answers here: Closed 11 years ago. Possible Duplicates: What is the copy-and-swap idiom?
加载中,请稍侯......