My vote is for explicit '= delete' solution too. Without any base classes like NonCopyable. Maybe sometimes you want allow copy init (clone members) and deny copy assignment (deny following clones).
On 15 May 2016 at 13:17, Dimitry Sibiryakov <s...@ibphoenix.com> wrote: > 14.05.2016 23:59, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: >> Instead of write private copy constructor and operator=, what about >> start using a mixing at least for new code? >> >> It makes easier and much more clear. > > Even easier and clearer explicitly deleted constructor and operator: > > Car(const Car&) = delete; > Car& operator=(const Car&) = delete; > > And yes, you can do it at any point in hierarchy. > > -- > WBR, SD. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who > bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM > restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the > apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched! > https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j > Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel -- Egor Pugin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched! https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
