Re: [Boost-bugs] [Boost C++ Libraries] #10389: [container] Double free problem on boost::containers::vector<std::unique_ptr<T>>

Subject: Re: [Boost-bugs] [Boost C++ Libraries] #10389: [container] Double free problem on boost::containers::vector<std::unique_ptr<T>>
From: Boost C++ Libraries (noreply_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-08-22 12:19:05

#10389: [container] Double free problem on
boost::containers::vector<std::unique_ptr<T>>
-------------------------------------+-------------------------
  Reporter:  kbinani <kbinani.bt@…>  |      Owner:  johnmaddock
      Type:  Bugs                    |     Status:  new
 Milestone:  To Be Determined        |  Component:  type_traits
   Version:  Boost 1.56.0            |   Severity:  Problem
Resolution:                          |   Keywords:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------
Changes (by igaztanaga):

 * owner:  igaztanaga => johnmaddock
 * component:  container => type_traits

Comment:

 I've found boost::has_trivial_copy returns true for unique_ptr in Clang.
 I've found related issues here:

 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12754886/has-trivial-copy-behaves-

 differently-in-clang-and-gcc-whos-right

 and

 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22812183/a-deleted-default-constructor-

 could-still-be-trivial

 the problem is that it's not clear if types with deleted copy constructor
 can still be trivially copy constructible.

 I don't know if boost::has_trivial_copy has defined behaviour on this and
 this might be a bug, I'm reassining to TypeTraits (John) in case it's
 considered a bug.

 If not, please reassign it to Container. The workaround is to use
 is_copy_constructible && has_trivial_copy to know if a type has a copy
 constructor that is trivial, and memcpy can be used to move objects.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/10389#comment:1>
Boost C++ Libraries <http://www.boost.org/>
Boost provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries.