On 4/27/21 1:58 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 2:46 AM Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
<gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
PR 90904 notes that auto_vec is unsafe to copy and assign because
the class manages its own memory but doesn't define (or delete)
either special function. Since I first ran into the problem,
auto_vec has grown a move ctor and move assignment from
a dynamically-allocated vec but still no copy ctor or copy
assignment operator.
The attached patch adds the two special functions to auto_vec along
with a few simple tests. It makes auto_vec safe to use in containers
that expect copyable and assignable element types and passes bootstrap
and regression testing on x86_64-linux.
The question is whether we want such uses to appear since those
can be quite inefficient? Thus the option is to delete those operators?
I would strongly prefer the generic vector class to have the properties
expected of any other generic container: copyable and assignable. If
we also want another vector type with this restriction I suggest to add
another "noncopyable" type and make that property explicit in its name.
I can submit one in a followup patch if you think we need one.
Martin
