John Maddock wrote:
The warnings are raised when a class or structure does *not* have an explicit copy-constructor or assignment operator declared, *and* one could not be generated automatically by the compiler. However, the warnings are issued even though neither the copy-constructor nor the assignment operator are ever used - if they were used then you would get a compiler error.
I don't mind the errors, but it seems a warning about something not required is maybe a little over the top.
BTW if I remember correctly you get the same warnings if you declare a class that inherits from noncopyable which rather destroys the whole point of that one :-(
You are correct, you do. I tend to be asked to write programs which are largely user configurable within their application domain, so all my application classes tend to inherit from a base class which links the object to the user configuration (eg user names for objects, user descriptions, etc) so that all my user-messages are tailored for their configuration. Anyway, I always start with the base class inheriting from noncopyable because I really, really only want one instance of each of these objects -- many pointers to that instance is fine, but only one actual instance. Consequently, as you can guess, my compile output is littered with these warnings.
HTH, John.
Thanks for your comments! Kevin