On 30/08/13 11:11, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
...because boost::noncopyable has become the de-facto standard idiom for
this, at least for pre-C++11 code that depends on Boost anyway.
[citation missing]
Sure, nice to have standard idiom that causes us to have to work-around
implementation bugs. Where two private declarations could be enough. But
then maybe I am too low-level for the modern C++ developers. I even know
how to manage my memory myself :)
F.
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.