why this operator is protected? I want to use it!
I guess, this comment from CVS can help
[quote]From Federico Carminati:
“I have implemented all copy and equal operators needed to silence all
warnings in AliRoot, as requested. I have implemented shallow copies as
would do the default operators synthetized by the compiler.
Most operators are protected. If users complain, you just have to move
them into the public area, but class derivation is of course supported.
It has been a terrible job, I have modified 278 files, but the changes
are backward compabile, and this goes a long way to permitting user to
use the effc++ flag with root headers.”[/quote]
PS. IMHO If you do the current TBox::operator= public and try to use it, you can possibly get some bad results - its implementation is incorrect now (I’m talking about fTip and its deletion in a destructor).
[quote=“tpochep”]
PS. IMHO If you do the current TBox::operator= public and try to use it, you can possibly get some bad results - its implementation is incorrect now (I’m talking about fTip and its deletion in a destructor).[/quote]
a good reason to fix it. I don’t know the detail of root class, but TBox is not a complex class! See the law of the big three:
“A class with any of {destructor, assignment operator, copy constructor} generally needs all 3” parashift.com/c+±faq-lite/c … #faq-27.10
[quote]
a good reason to fix it. I don’t know the detail of root class, but TBox is not a complex class! See the law of the big three:
“A class with any of {destructor, assignment operator, copy constructor} generally needs all 3” parashift.com/c+±faq-lite/c … #faq-27.10[/quote]
I do not need any laws, I do know C++. The only law for me is ISO/IEC 14882.
TBox and its operators/ctors/dtors - it’s not me who write them, and I do not know, how tooltips are managed in ROOT.