Is it good practice to generally make heavyweight classes non-copyable?
Posted
by Emile Cormier
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by Emile Cormier
Published on 2010-03-19T15:58:43Z
Indexed on
2010/03/19
16:01 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 301
I have a Shape class containing potentially many vertices, and I was contemplating making copy-constructor/copy-assignment private to prevent accidental needless copying of my heavyweight class (for example, passing by value instead of by reference).
To make a copy of Shape, one would have to deliberately call a "clone" or "duplicate" method.
Is this good practice? I wonder why STL containers don't use this approach, as I rarely want to pass them by value.
© Stack Overflow or respective owner