🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <gregorDEtM0t.Hw2@netcom.com>, gregor@netcom.com (Greg Colvin) wrote:

> In article <199509111753.AA15077@xs1.xs4all.nl> veldhuis@xs4all.nl writes:
> >It seems to me that in the assignment a deep copy should be performed in 
> >stead of a binary copy.
> 
> That would require that the type being pointed to have a copy constructor.
> If you wish you can write b.reset(new int(*a)) instead of b = a.
> 

A copy constructor will not suffice in many cases. If a contains an object
of some polymorphic class,you would need to write something akin to
b.reset(a->clone()).

I imagine that this semantic requirement is a sufficient reason for the
_standard_ auto_ptr template not to try to do fancy things like copying its
contents (although it should be easy to derive your own my_auto_ptr template
which does.

-- 
Scott Howlett
Storm Software, Inc.
howlett@netcom.com
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]