Re: [boost] [fusion][map] default construction semantics

Subject: Re: [boost] [fusion][map] default construction semantics
From: Rutger ter Borg (rutger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-25 11:22:06

Thomas Klimpel wrote:

> This looks like a function declaration to me (a function with name "map"
> that takes no arguments and returns a map_type), but C++ might be
> intelligent enough to see that it is a default initialization.

Yes, my mistake.

>>     // Compiler error -- tries to copy
>>     map_type map;
> 
> This looks like a default initialization to me. I have no idea, whether
> this default initialization should compile without error.

Well, the docs state that it would call the default constructor of all
elements, which I think it does not, otherwise there would not be a
boost::noncopyable block, or would there?

Thanks,

Rutger