-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Michael Goldshteyn Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 2:25 PM To: boost@lists.boost.org 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...