Hi all,
I am trying to understanding std::auto_ptr<T class implementation from
"The C++ standard library" by Nicolai Josuttis. He gives a sample
implementation of auto_ptr class template in section 4.2. The copy
constructor is defined as:
auto_ptr (auto_ptr& rhs) throw()
: ap (rhs. release()) {
}
I was wondering, is there not a leak here ? I mean before taking
ownership of the memory pointed to by rhs, shouldn't the memory pointed
to by ap be relased (freed) ? I am expecting the copy constructor to be
this way:
auto_ptr(auto_p tr& rhs) throw() {
delete ap; // Isn't this required ?
ap = rhs.release();
}
If the delete ap is removed from the definition, I think the memory
which is already being pointed to by ap (before the copy constructor is
called) will leak. Please comment.
Thanks in advance.
/P 10 2630
dragoncoder wrote:
Hi all,
I am trying to understanding std::auto_ptr<T class implementation from
"The C++ standard library" by Nicolai Josuttis. He gives a sample
implementation of auto_ptr class template in section 4.2. The copy
constructor is defined as:
auto_ptr (auto_ptr& rhs) throw()
: ap (rhs. release()) {
}
I was wondering, is there not a leak here ? I mean before taking
ownership of the memory pointed to by rhs, shouldn't the memory pointed
to by ap be relased (freed) ? I am expecting the copy constructor to be
this way:
auto_ptr(auto_p tr& rhs) throw() {
delete ap; // Isn't this required ?
ap = rhs.release();
}
If the delete ap is removed from the definition, I think the memory
which is already being pointed to by ap (before the copy constructor is
called) will leak. Please comment.
You're confusing the assignment operator with the copy constructor. The
latter is, by definition, only invoked for an object that has not yet
been created and therefore does not have anything to delete.
Cheers! --M
dragoncoder wrote:
Hi all,
I am trying to understanding std::auto_ptr<T class implementation from
"The C++ standard library" by Nicolai Josuttis. He gives a sample
implementation of auto_ptr class template in section 4.2. The copy
constructor is defined as:
auto_ptr (auto_ptr& rhs) throw()
: ap (rhs. release()) {
}
I was wondering, is there not a leak here ? I mean before taking
ownership of the memory pointed to by rhs, shouldn't the memory pointed
to by ap be relased (freed) ? I am expecting the copy constructor to be
this way:
auto_ptr(auto_p tr& rhs) throw() {
delete ap; // Isn't this required ?
No, its not required. ap is not set at this point.
Copy ctors create new objects.
Its the rhs.ap that has the object. therefore... release() ... to
transfer ownership
ap = rhs.release();
}
If the delete ap is removed from the definition, I think the memory
which is already being pointed to by ap (before the copy constructor is
called) will leak. Please comment.
copy ctors aren't called, they are invoked.
>
Thanks in advance.
/P
Thats a copy ctor.
You are confusing construction and assignment (where auto_ptr *does*
own an object).
Now look at the assignment operator (which is really what you had in
mind):
template< typename T >
auto_ptr& operator= (auto_ptr< T >& rhs) throw()
{
reset(rhs.relea se()); // release rhs.ap and (re)set this->ap with its
value.
return *this;
}
Which in effect transfers ownership.
note:
int n(5); // ctor
n = 4; // asignment
int m = n; // copy ctor - NOT an assignment !!!
int x(n); // copy ctor
m = x; // assignment
assignments modify an existing object, all ctors, including copy ctors,
create a *new* objects.
The difference between a plain ctor and a copy ctor is how the members
are getting their values.
All ctors construct (one way or another).
Assignments do not construct.
Its futile to zap any member in a copy since its a brand new object.
Sorry, i can't say it any other way.
* Salt_Peter:
>
copy ctors aren't called, they are invoked.
The C++ standard mostly uses the term "called". In a few places it uses
the term "invoked". There's no inherent difference in meaning, but no
matter whether "call" or "invoked" is used, there are several different
possible meanings, and the one that applies depends on the context.
--
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?
dragoncoder wrote:
>
I am trying to understanding std::auto_ptr<T class implementation from
Bad idea. <gauto_ptr is a dreadful hack. It relies on corner cases in
the language definition, and it's tricky to implement.
--
-- Pete
Roundhouse Consulting, Ltd. -- www.versatilecoding.com
Author of "The Standard C++ Library Extensions: a Tutorial and
Reference." For more information about this book, see www.petebecker.com/tr1book.
dragoncoder wrote:
Hi all,
I am trying to understanding std::auto_ptr<T class implementation from
"The C++ standard library" by Nicolai Josuttis. He gives a sample
implementation of auto_ptr class template in section 4.2. The copy
constructor is defined as:
auto_ptr (auto_ptr& rhs) throw()
: ap (rhs. release()) {
}
I was wondering, is there not a leak here ? I mean before taking
ownership of the memory pointed to by rhs, shouldn't the memory pointed
to by ap be relased (freed) ? I am expecting the copy constructor to be
this way:
auto_ptr(auto_p tr& rhs) throw() {
delete ap; // Isn't this required ?
ap = rhs.release();
}
If the delete ap is removed from the definition, I think the memory
which is already being pointed to by ap (before the copy constructor is
called) will leak. Please comment.
When this constructor is invoked there is no memory to be freed, the
object was not alive before.
But I think its wrong to call this constructor the copy constructor.
I think the copy constructor and copy asignment of auto_ptr are
private. This is why you cannot do
std::vector<aut o_ptr<T v;
v.push_back( auto_ptr<T>(new T) );
The copy constructor and copy asignment are supposed to have
signatures ( at least I think)
class T {
........
T(const T& t);
T& operator=(const T& t);
..........
};
For auto_ptr
auto_ptr<T(auto _ptr<T>& t);
auto_ptr<T>& operator=(auto_ ptr<T>& t);
are public but
auto_ptr<T(cons t auto_ptr<T>& t);
auto_ptr<T>& operator=(const auto_ptr<T>& t);
are private.
auto_ptr<T>& operator=(const auto_ptr<T>& t) should be defined as
auto_ptr<T>& operator=(auto_ ptr<T>& t){
this->reset(t.releas e()) //
}
dragoncoder wrote:
Hi all,
I am trying to understanding std::auto_ptr<T class implementation from
"The C++ standard library" by Nicolai Josuttis. He gives a sample
implementation of auto_ptr class template in section 4.2. The copy
constructor is defined as:
auto_ptr (auto_ptr& rhs) throw()
: ap (rhs. release()) {
}
I was wondering, is there not a leak here ? I mean before taking
ownership of the memory pointed to by rhs, shouldn't the memory pointed
to by ap be relased (freed) ? I am expecting the copy constructor to be
this way:
auto_ptr(auto_p tr& rhs) throw() {
delete ap; // Isn't this required ?
ap = rhs.release();
}
If the delete ap is removed from the definition, I think the memory
which is already being pointed to by ap (before the copy constructor is
called) will leak. Please comment.
Thanks in advance.
/P
As already mentioned:
Don't waist your time with auto_ptr.
Understand that it breaks the rules since the source is modified on
copy and assignment.
Salt_Peter wrote:
dragoncoder wrote:
Hi all,
I am trying to understanding std::auto_ptr<T class implementation from
"The C++ standard library" by Nicolai Josuttis. He gives a sample
implementation of auto_ptr class template in section 4.2. The copy
constructor is defined as:
auto_ptr (auto_ptr& rhs) throw()
: ap (rhs. release()) {
}
I was wondering, is there not a leak here ? I mean before taking
ownership of the memory pointed to by rhs, shouldn't the memory pointed
to by ap be relased (freed) ? I am expecting the copy constructor to be
this way:
auto_ptr(auto_p tr& rhs) throw() {
delete ap; // Isn't this required ?
ap = rhs.release();
}
If the delete ap is removed from the definition, I think the memory
which is already being pointed to by ap (before the copy constructor is
called) will leak. Please comment.
Thanks in advance.
/P
As already mentioned:
Don't waist your time with auto_ptr.
Understand that it breaks the rules since the source is modified on
copy and assignment.
I am not sure why you say this, what rules is it breaking ? The source
is only modified when passed as a non-const reference. The user knows
the signature of this assignement and constructor, and these do not
promise not to midify the source.
Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
* Salt_Peter:
copy ctors aren't called, they are invoked.
The C++ standard mostly uses the term "called". In a few places it uses
the term "invoked". There's no inherent difference in meaning, but no
matter whether "call" or "invoked" is used, there are several different
possible meanings, and the one that applies depends on the context.
Uh oh..not this one again :P
Actually the future standard is going to have a very specific
definition of invoke. See section 3 in TR1.
* Noah Roberts:
Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>* Salt_Peter:
>>copy ctors aren't called, they are invoked.
The C++ standard mostly uses the term "called". In a few places it uses the term "invoked". There's no inherent difference in meaning, but no matter whether "call" or "invoked" is used, there are several different possible meanings, and the one that applies depends on the context.
Uh oh..not this one again :P
Yes, it should be a FAQ.
Actually the future standard is going to have a very specific
definition of invoke. See section 3 in TR1.
Sorry, that's incorrect. Presumably you're referring to TR1:§3.3.
That's a technical helper definition for a very specific (contextual)
meaning of invoke/call, namely to help define the functionality of
functor objects, which is why INVOKE is spelled in uppercase. INVOKE in
uppercase in that section of TR1 is not the same as invoke or call in
lowercase in the standard, or for that matter, in TR1 (also TR1 uses the
terms "call" and "invoke" interchangeably ).
--
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? This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics |
by: Siemel Naran |
last post by:
This code fails compile
std::auto_ptr<Base> f() {
std::auto_ptr<Derived> out(new Derived());
return out;
}
There is ambiguity between a templated constructor and templated operator
conversion, according to my compiler. Seems there are too many constructors
and operator conversions. But this code works:
|
by: Kurt Stutsman |
last post by:
I am developing a type that protects ownership of data with non-const
ref copy-constructor and assignment operator similiar to auto_ptr<>. I
read that auto_ptr<> uses auto_ptr_ref to fascilitate returning from a
functoin and managed to get that working. However, when I try to assign
a value returned from this function, it doesn't work. I looked at the
auto_ptr<> implementation and don't see clearly how it is handling it
either. Anyways...
|
by: guru.slt |
last post by:
Hi,
see this code:
auto_ptr<int> int_auto_p(new int(3));
auto_ptr<int> int_auto_p2(int_auto_p.get());
Then, both auto_pointer will own the same object. That will violate the
single ownership expectation on auto_pointer.
|
by: Evgeny |
last post by:
Hi, all!
I try to convert my existing code written in VC6 to VC7 and have some
problem with stl auto pointer template.
class CColumn;
#include <memory>
typedef auto_ptr<CMyBase> CMyBasePtr;
class CMyBase
{
|
by: Stephan Hoffmann |
last post by:
Hi,
I'm new to std::auto_ptr<> and wanted to use it with
a base class and several derived classes.
I'm using gcc 3.3.5 and get a compile error I don't know
how to resolve when compiling the following (in file testInteger.cc):
line 38: std::auto_ptr<HInteger> d(new HInteger(5));
line 39: std::auto_ptr<HObject> e(new HObject());
| |
by: Szabolcs Horvát |
last post by:
Consider the attached example program: an object of type 'A' is inserted
into a 'map<int, Am;'. Why does 'm;' call the copy constructor of
'A' twice in addition to a constructor call?
The constructors and copy constructors in 'A' report when they are
called. 'whoami' is just a unique identifier assigned to every object of
type 'A'. The output of the program is:
constructor 0
constructor 1
|
by: james.lawton |
last post by:
Hi,
I'm having a problem that I can't diagnose. I'm creating istreams of
unknown types, and want to manage them on the stack, co I'm passing
around ownership-holding pointers. Usually, I would use
std::auto_ptr<std::istream>, but it seems to be deallocating early, as
the call to read(...) below breaks.
I've condensed a test case. Using my own pointer works fine, but using
auto_ptr does not (see USE_AUTO_PTR). I solved the issue by a...
|
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main usage, and What is the difference between ONU and Router. Let’s take a closer look !
Part I. Meaning of...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it.
First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
|
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that captivates audiences and drives business growth.
The Art of Business Website Design
Your website is...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For most users, this new feature is actually very convenient. If you want to control the update process,...
| |
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the choice of these technologies. I'm particularly interested in Zigbee because I've heard it does some...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own....
Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupré who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules.
He will explain when you may want to use classes instead of User Defined Types (UDT). For example, to manage the data in unbound forms.
Adolph will...
|
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
|
by: bsmnconsultancy |
last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence can significantly impact your brand's success. BSMN Consultancy, a leader in Website Development in Toronto offers valuable insights into creating effective websites that not only look great but also perform exceptionally well. In this comprehensive...
| |