"Howard Hinnant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > [...] > ******************************************************* > * * > * Do not move from an lvalue with copy syntax. * > * * > *******************************************************
Howard, I'd appreciate it if you stopped beating around the bush, and just say what you're trying to say. All these subtle games are too much for me. ;> > [...] > To implement the sample C++98 move_ptr, I literally started with > auto_ptr source and just disabled the "copy" from lvalue by making > it private, and then shook what was left around until it passed a few > simple unit tests. It is just a proof of concept that you don't have > to move with copy syntax in C++98. So, if I understand you correctly, the relevant translation of "Howard's Principle" for move_ptr is: *************************************************** * * Do not allow move_ptr(move_ptr&) or operator=(move_ptr&)!!!! * *************************************************** If so, that is the important piece of info I needed. I suppose that declaring move_ptr(move_ptr const&) private, and not declaring move_ptr(move_ptr&) at all has the same effect. So it seems that Mojo observes Howard's Principle. Dave _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
