From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-27 09:29:05
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
| Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
| > because you had to put "polymorphic" in front of "value" to describe
| > what it means;
| > polymorphic objects don't have value-based copy-semantics; you can't
| > provide meaningful copy-constructor
| > and copy-assignment operators.
| A cloning pointer holding a polymorphic object is CopyConstructible and
| Assignable. Why is this not meaningful?
it could be, but know you're not talking about the original, wrapped
| A vector of cloning pointers is also CopyConstructible and Assignable.
cool, then use that if you need to; but without move-semantics you're gonna
pay performance wise.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk