Re: [boost] Documenting non-copyable-ness (was: Re: Review: Boost.Threads)

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-09-04 09:07:41

----- Original Message -----
From: "Fernando Cacciola" <fcacciola_at_[hidden]>

> The current concern is that every noncopyable class is rooted at
> 'noncopyable', that is, a *single* and *uniquely identified* class:
> noncopyable.
>
> Consider:
>
> class Foo : noncopyable {} ;
> class Bar : noncopyable {} ;
>
> Those two classes are *completely unrelated*, yet they belong to the same
> hierarchy.
> This fact -the conceptually wrong hierarchical relation between them- is
> messy and a very subtle source of problems; even though most applications
> will hide this.

Aww, c'mon. Have you ever had a problem due to a shared /private/ base class
of unrelated classes?

> Messy because in a graphical class browser everything is rooted at
> noncopyable.
> Error prone (very subtle) because, as it was expressed, one can manage
both
> classes through a noncopyable*.

How do you acquire such a pointer?

-Dave