Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
To prohibit copy construction and copy assignment, I’ve seen the boost noncopyable class and in the Google style guide the DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN macro. Is there any reason to prefer one of the techniques over the other, or any subtle differences one should be aware of?
I prefer boost noncopyable over the macro because it’s not a macro and it is easier (IMO) to use.
In real code, i’m using neither of them and write the two declarations needed myself.
A subtle difference you might be interested in, though, is that using that macro or your own declarations will not give a compiler error when the class itself tries to copy the object (but rather fail to link later on).
noncopyablehowever will also signal a compiler error in this case, because it’s the base-class that has the functions declared private, not the class itself.