https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=426175
--- Comment #202 from Marcel <maes...@gmail.com> --- Gilles, thank you for your effort. I will test the code now again. Should I run Digikam with the address sanitizer enabled? In my opinion we could close this huge bug and open new bugs for new problems, is that all right? I followed all of your code changes concerning this bug. In my opinion there is one thing that could increase the readability. You often completed the class definition to match the rule of 3. See https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/rule_of_three. Why didn't you defined the constructors in a c++11 way? Instead of making it private you could use delete or instead of implement an empty constructor/destructor, default could be used. Or did I miss a technical detail about that? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
