[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: CSmartHandle

From: Oto BREZINA <otik_at_e-posta.sk>
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2015 20:23:34 +0100

On 2015-12-22 9:40, Stefan Küng wrote:
> On 22.12.2015 08:24, Oto BREZINA wrote:
>> On 2015-12-21 21:36, Stefan Küng wrote:
>>> On 21.12.2015 21:19, Oto BREZINA wrote:
>>>> On 2015-12-21 19:37, Stefan Küng wrote:
>>>>> You're right.
>>>>> I've changed it in r27081.
>>>> nice one, why to call default constructor with this solution ?
>>> because with C++11 it's possible, and it avoids code duplication (even
>>> if the initialization is only one line of code).
>> Ok. Anyway, I don't see a point there. 1st no other (conversion)
>> constructor use that, 2nd the only value/member get overwritten
>> Oto
>> PS: compiler we use is not C++11 yet, and Im trying to make code as
> If it's not c++11 yet, then why do you need the move constructors?
Compiler has not full C++11, but got move constructor.

As I wrote I want to have code to be as close as possible so I can move
new features, fixes etc easily. I even keep original formatting even it
is not by our style.

Let me refraze original question. Should be Default constructor called
in CSmartHandle(HandleType && h) too, or can be removed in
CSmartHandle(CSmartHandle && h). I would go for second.
> Stefan


To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [dev-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].
Received on 2015-12-25 20:23:49 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the TortoiseSVN Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.