On 7/12/18 4:29 PM, Manu wrote:
Being able to implement them both independently is*occasionally* useful, but 95% of the time, destruct + copy-construct is an equally efficient implementation for assignment. I'd suggest that this destruct+copy-construct pattern is a perfectly good substitute for assignment in most cases, and maybe the compiler should deploy the pattern as an implicit copy constructor in lieu of an explicit one? So, if the user specifies a complex copy constructor, but no assignment operator (which just blits on copy), then they've almost certainly introduced a bug on copying! Perhaps the compiler should automatically emit an assignment operator implemented as above in presence of a (suite of? [const/immutable/etc permutations]) 'complex' copy constructor?
Not the charter of the current DIP.
