trivial or non-trivial object

[baibaichen]

hi, i am reading a C++ book, it mentions a term non-trivial object.
what i understand is:
if a object has:
a) trivial constructor
b) trivial assignment operator
c) trivial destructor

then it is a trvial object, otherwise it is a non trivial obect, right?

thanks

[Alf P. Steinbach]

* baibaichen:

hi, i am reading a C++ book, it mentions a term non-trivial object.
what i understand is:
if a object has:
a) trivial constructor
b) trivial assignment operator
c) trivial destructor

then it is a trvial object, otherwise it is a non trivial obect, right?

"Trivial object" is not a term defined by the standard or in common use as a
technical term. It probably means just what it says, like, "green bird".

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

[Jim Langston]

"baibaichen " <ba********@gma il.com> wrote in message
news:11******** **************@ f14g2000cwb.goo glegroups.com.. .

hi, i am reading a C++ book, it mentions a term non-trivial object.
what i understand is:
if a object has:
a) trivial constructor
b) trivial assignment operator
c) trivial destructor

then it is a trvial object, otherwise it is a non trivial obect, right?

thanks

"trivial object" is not a standard C++ term. He is probably refering to POD
or not. POD being plain old data.

[osmium]

"baibaichen " writes:

hi, i am reading a C++ book, it mentions a term non-trivial object.
what i understand is:
if a object has:
a) trivial constructor
b) trivial assignment operator
c) trivial destructor

then it is a trvial object, otherwise it is a non trivial obect, right?

There are a bunch of hits on Google for <trivial object c++>.