Re: [eigen] private copy ctors

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More Archives ]

OK thanks for the reply and sorry, indeed it is assignment operators
and not copy ctors.

I didn't realize that you only did that in internal classes. Looking
back at it, it's true. Some classes a a bit on the border: for
example, it's not fully clear to me that SelfAdjointView is only
internal and that nobody would want to use its assignment operator.
It's not a big deal however, since there still is the copy ctor.


2009/12/12 Hauke Heibel <hauke.heibel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Of course I ran all unit tests before comitting. The idea is that the
> assignment operators in question are not required - this is emphasized by
> not only making them private but also leaving out the implementation. Those
> small objects are internal only (no outside user should ever be required to
> work with them) and are never copied. They are just proxies or something
> like spring-boards to the real implementations ...
> So, to be clear. It were many changes and I hope I did not by accident add
> any private assignment operator to public (for the outside world) classes,
> nor do I hope that I made copy constructors private (though even those are

> probably not required).
> - Hauke
> p.s. I just double checked - its only assignment operators.
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> this is about Hauke's changeset c2937e22f0aa.
>> It adds private copy ctors a bit everywhere.
>> I would be interested in some rationalization for that:
>>  - what warnings does it fix? (what were these warnings saying)
>>  - why is it OK to have the copy ctors private? Doesnt it prevent one
>> from making copies?
>> I'm probably missing something obvious!!
>> Benoit

Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+