From: Sohail Somani (s.somani_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-18 18:30:04
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Michael Goldshteyn
> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 2:25 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [boost] boost::noncopyable
> Is there a reason why the prototype for noncopyable's
> operator= is improper.
> It is:
> const noncopyable& operator=( const noncopyable& );
> instead of
> noncopyable& operator=( const noncopyable& );
Isn't this private and not implemented, therefore making the point moot?
It should be by my guesstimate.
> Also, shouldn't the destructor really be virtual?
You can't seriously be deleting pointers to noncopyables...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk