From: Jeremy Siek (jsiek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-07 20:41:18
On Sunday, March 7, 2004, at 04:31 PM, Jan Gaspar wrote:
> overwritten. Now if there will be the assignment idiom
> applied the front-most will be assigned to the new one
> - it will be not destroyed (no destructor will be
> called). IMHO this is not correct. The old element
> will not disappear - just its value/state will be
> different. I think that the overwrite operation means
> destruction of the old object, NOT assignment. What do
> you think?
I don't see how it makes any difference from the semantic point
of view. Other than tracing calls to destructors, are there any
other ways to tell the difference?
Another note about the documentation... whichever way this
issues end up, more needs to be said about it in the docs.
Currently, the docs say "overwrite" which to me sounds like
assignment, and the docs never mention destroying the
objects. I think you either need to give a technical definition
for what you mean by "overwrite", or better yet, use different words.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk