Hi Pierre-Jean, The osg::Image constructor doesn't support shallow copy for the internal image data, it will allocated a new image block and copy across the data. This means for the image data itself it's effective a deep copy.
A shallow copy would be technically possible by would force one to start reference counting the image data. However, this doesn't make any sense in the context of an osg::Image, if you want to share the image data then you should be sharing the osg::Image object not the internal data it holds. My recommendation is not to do a shallow copy at all, but just share the osg::Image. Robert. On 16 August 2016 at 10:27, Pierre-Jean Petitprez <pierre-jean.petitp...@inria.fr> wrote: > Hi, > > In my application I have two osg::Images, the second one is a shallow copy of > the first one thanks to the copy constructor. > Is it safe to delete the first image and keep only the second one, or should > I use deep copy instead? > My tests showed me that the data is still reachable but when looking at the > image destructor it clearly deallocates the data. > > Thanks for enlightening me, > > Cheers, > Pierre-Jean > > ------------------ > Read this topic online here: > http://forum.openscenegraph.org/viewtopic.php?p=68380#68380 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
