useer degined Copy ctor, and copy-ctors further down the chain - compiler bug ? programers brainbug
Posted
by J.Colmsee
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by J.Colmsee
Published on 2010-03-08T07:52:49Z
Indexed on
2010/03/08
8:06 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 220
Hi. i have a little problem, and I am not sure if it's a compiler bug, or stupidity on my side. I have this struct :
struct BulletFXData
{
int time_next_fx_counter;
int next_fx_steps;
Particle particles[2];//this is the interesting one
ParticleManager::ParticleId particle_id[2];
};
The member "Particle particles[2]" has a self-made kind of smart-ptr in it (resource-counted texture-class). this smart-pointer has a default constructor, that initializes to the ptr to 0 (but that is not important)
I also have another struct, containing the BulletFXData struct :
struct BulletFX
{
BulletFXData data;
BulletFXRenderFunPtr render_fun_ptr;
BulletFXUpdateFunPtr update_fun_ptr;
BulletFXExplosionFunPtr explode_fun_ptr;
BulletFXLifetimeOverFunPtr lifetime_over_fun_ptr;
BulletFX( BulletFXData data,
BulletFXRenderFunPtr render_fun_ptr,
BulletFXUpdateFunPtr update_fun_ptr,
BulletFXExplosionFunPtr explode_fun_ptr,
BulletFXLifetimeOverFunPtr lifetime_over_fun_ptr)
:data(data),
render_fun_ptr(render_fun_ptr),
update_fun_ptr(update_fun_ptr),
explode_fun_ptr(explode_fun_ptr),
lifetime_over_fun_ptr(lifetime_over_fun_ptr)
{
}
/*
//USER DEFINED copy-ctor. if it's defined things go crazy
BulletFX(const BulletFX& rhs)
:data(data),//this line of code seems to do a plain memory-copy without calling the right ctors
render_fun_ptr(render_fun_ptr),
update_fun_ptr(update_fun_ptr),
explode_fun_ptr(explode_fun_ptr),
lifetime_over_fun_ptr(lifetime_over_fun_ptr)
{
}
*/
};
If i use the user-defined copy-ctor my smart-pointer class goes crazy, and it seems that calling the CopyCtor / assignment operator aren't called as they should. So - does this all make sense ? it seems as if my own copy-ctor of struct BulletFX should do exactly what the compiler-generated would, but it seems to forget to call the right constructors down the chain. compiler bug ? me being stupid ?
Sorry about the big code, some small example could have illustrated too. but often you guys ask for the real code, so well - here it is :D
© Stack Overflow or respective owner