default-copy-constructor

Call to implicitly deleted copy constructor in LLVM

只谈情不闲聊 提交于 2019-12-29 11:46:20
问题 As per C++11 rules 6 things (default constructor, copy constructor, move constructor, copy assignment, move assignment and destructor ) are generated by default. By second rule, when any custom copy, move or destructor is defined then those default operations are not generated. But in my code that follows that is not the case. But this code fails to compile with an error call to implicitly deleted copy constructor of 'Uni' When I write my own copy constructor for Uni everything works fine.

Call to implicitly deleted copy constructor in LLVM

[亡魂溺海] 提交于 2019-12-29 11:46:10
问题 As per C++11 rules 6 things (default constructor, copy constructor, move constructor, copy assignment, move assignment and destructor ) are generated by default. By second rule, when any custom copy, move or destructor is defined then those default operations are not generated. But in my code that follows that is not the case. But this code fails to compile with an error call to implicitly deleted copy constructor of 'Uni' When I write my own copy constructor for Uni everything works fine.

C# Automatic deep copy of struct

醉酒当歌 提交于 2019-12-04 02:56:06
问题 I have a struct, MyStruct , that has a private member private bool[] boolArray; and a method ChangeBoolValue(int index, bool Value) . I have a class, MyClass , that has a field public MyStruct bools { get; private set; } When I create a new MyStruct object from an existing one, and then apply method ChangeBoolValue(), the bool array in both objects is changed, because the reference, not what was referred to, was copied to the new object. E.g: MyStruct A = new MyStruct(); MyStruct B = A; /

Assignment operator and copy constructor in the presence of references

若如初见. 提交于 2019-12-03 18:05:51
问题 I am just experimenting with the references using this code: class A { }; class B { public: B(A& a): m_a(a){} A& m_a; }; int main() { A a; B b(a); B b1 = b; } I was expecting both B b1 = b; to produce a error. Instead when I compile with VS2008 I just get a warning warning C4512: 'B' : assignment operator could not be generated I understand why I am getting this warning. But shouldn't the compiler generating an error for the B b1 = b; statement too? It is like it generated copy constructor

C# Automatic deep copy of struct

 ̄綄美尐妖づ 提交于 2019-12-01 15:21:53
I have a struct, MyStruct , that has a private member private bool[] boolArray; and a method ChangeBoolValue(int index, bool Value) . I have a class, MyClass , that has a field public MyStruct bools { get; private set; } When I create a new MyStruct object from an existing one, and then apply method ChangeBoolValue(), the bool array in both objects is changed, because the reference, not what was referred to, was copied to the new object. E.g: MyStruct A = new MyStruct(); MyStruct B = A; //Copy of A made B.ChangeBoolValue(0,true); //Now A.BoolArr[0] == B.BoolArr[0] == true Is there a way of

Call to implicitly deleted copy constructor in LLVM

大憨熊 提交于 2019-11-29 20:54:13
As per C++11 rules 6 things (default constructor, copy constructor, move constructor, copy assignment, move assignment and destructor ) are generated by default. By second rule, when any custom copy, move or destructor is defined then those default operations are not generated. But in my code that follows that is not the case. But this code fails to compile with an error call to implicitly deleted copy constructor of 'Uni' When I write my own copy constructor for Uni everything works fine. (It is commented in the code, given for reference ) Any thoughts much appreciated. Finally , I am running

Assignment operator and copy constructor in the presence of references

亡梦爱人 提交于 2019-11-29 09:45:20
I am just experimenting with the references using this code: class A { }; class B { public: B(A& a): m_a(a){} A& m_a; }; int main() { A a; B b(a); B b1 = b; } I was expecting both B b1 = b; to produce a error. Instead when I compile with VS2008 I just get a warning warning C4512: 'B' : assignment operator could not be generated I understand why I am getting this warning. But shouldn't the compiler generating an error for the B b1 = b; statement too? It is like it generated copy constructor but didn't generate assignment operator. Aren't these two inherently linked to one another ? does it

C++ implicit copy constructor for a class that contains other objects

泄露秘密 提交于 2019-11-26 12:50:12
I know that the compiler sometimes provides a default copy constructor if you don't implement yourself. I am confused about what exactly this constructor does. If I have a class that contains other objects, none of which have a declared copy constructor, what will the behavior be? For example, a class like this: class Foo { Bar bar; }; class Bar { int i; Baz baz; }; class Baz { int j; }; Now if I do this: Foo f1; Foo f2(f1); What will the default copy constructor do? Will the compiler-generated copy constructor in Foo call the compiler-generated constructor in Bar to copy over bar , which will

C++ implicit copy constructor for a class that contains other objects

我是研究僧i 提交于 2019-11-26 02:48:52
问题 I know that the compiler sometimes provides a default copy constructor if you don\'t implement yourself. I am confused about what exactly this constructor does. If I have a class that contains other objects, none of which have a declared copy constructor, what will the behavior be? For example, a class like this: class Foo { Bar bar; }; class Bar { int i; Baz baz; }; class Baz { int j; }; Now if I do this: Foo f1; Foo f2(f1); What will the default copy constructor do? Will the compiler