Re: [PATCH] [4.6] shared_ptr needs explicit copy constructor

[Chase Douglas <chase dot douglas at canonical dot com>]

On 01/03/2012 10:13 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 3 January 2012 18:07, Chase Douglas wrote:
>> I rebuilt the library with this
>> change to gcc and ran the test suite. All passed normally.
> 
> That's what I needed to know, your original mail didn't say anything
> about running the test suite.
> 
> Looking at the patch again, why have you added destructors in
> shared_ptr_base.h?  That part of the patch is not backported from the
> PR 50500 fix, is it needed for Clang++?  If so, and G++ doesn't catch
> the errors, that would imply the fix for 50500 was incomplete and so
> should be reopened.

Sorry, I don't know exactly how that got in there (I did this over a
week ago). I thought I did:

$ svn diff -c 180159 > patch

Then removed all the stuff that did not look salient. I think I then
tried to compile, and got errors because __shared_ptr and __weak_ptr
also did not have explicitly defined copy constructors. I guess I then
found the changes in revision 173882, which also included the destructor
change in the same hunk.

I have removed the destructor declaration and recompiled my library and
tests. The tests ran properly. I'll resend the patch.

> The ChangeLog is in the wrong format:
> 
>> PR c++/50500
>> * Explicitly define default copy constructor for std::shared_ptr
> 
> This doesn't name the affected files.

Ok. This is my first gcc submission, so I'm still learning :).

Thanks!

-- Chase