Sign in to follow this  

Smart Pointer Constructor Strangeness

This topic is 4486 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Hi, I am writing my own smart pointer class, which seems to be working so far, but I was a little confused as there was a point I was expecting the compiler to complain when it didn't. I have the test code...
	MyTest* test2=new MyTest();
	MyTestPtr testp1=test2;
	MyTestPtr testp2=test2;
	MyTestPtr testp3=testp2;

which works fine when I have the constructors...
	SmartPointer(T* in_object);
	SmartPointer(SmartPointer& in_smartPointer);

but when I comment out the second constructor it STILL works. Why wouldn't the last line on the first section of code (MyTestPtr testp3=testp2) fail if there wasn't a constructor for the SmartPointer? BTW, MyTestPtr is just a typedef for a smart pointer to the test class MyTest (ie typedef SmartPointer<MyTest> MyTestPtr). Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's probably writing a default copy constructor for you, which, with smartpointers, or anything that holds a pointer, is bad. Don't comment out that constructor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is 4486 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this