Updates:
Status: Fixed
Labels: -Type-Enhancement -Patch-push Type-Maintainability Fixed_2_19_16
Comment #13 on issue 4156 by [email protected]: Patch: Define Smob<> constructors.
https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4156
Pushed to staging as
commit 7f309e69558db5225b92ae003c0818c68988013d
Author: David Kastrup <[email protected]>
Date: Wed Oct 8 16:46:52 2014 +0200
Issue 4156: Define Smob<> constructors
The purpose of this patch is to stop the previous implicit copying of
Smob<> data members in derived copy constructors.
To that purpose, Smob<> has received a private copy constructor (which
gcc unfortunately only considers worth a warning rather than an error
when implicitly used in a default copy constructor) and an inline
default constructor.
Several classes contained virtual copy constructors without being
actually copyable have had their copy constructor removed.
Several copy constructors just containing a failing assertion were
instead removed and left (privately) declared but not defined. This
standard C++ practice leads to link time rather than run time errors in
case an instance of such a class is copied.
Other smob-defining base classes (Simple_smob and Smob{1,2,3}) do not
actually have non-static data members that could be initialized.
Prohibiting the copying of Simple_smob as a base class seems rather
pointless as all of the data members of a derived class are under the
control of the derived class. However, Smob{1,2,3} "misuse" the this
pointer to contain an SCM value. Creating a copy would change the
associated address, a very undesirable operation. So Smob{1,2,3} have
its constructors private and/or disabled.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications to this address.
You may adjust your notification preferences at:
https://code.google.com/hosting/settings
