I'm trying to figure out is it possible to write a safe copy constructor with help of std::unique_ptr
inside.
This is my code:
#include <iostream>
#include <memory>
class A {
public:
A():_a(10){
std::cerr << "A() constructor" << std::endl;
}
A(const A& tmp){
_a = tmp._a;
std::cerr << "A() copy constructor" << std::endl;
}
~A(){
std::cerr << "~A()" << std::endl;
}
int _a;
};
class B {
public:
B():_b(5){
std::cerr << "B() constructor" << std::endl;
}
B(const B& tmp){
std::cerr << "B() copy constructor" << std::endl;
throw std::exception("exc");
}
~B(){
std::cerr << "~B()" << std::endl;
}
int _b;
};
class C {
public:
C():a(nullptr),b(nullptr){
std::cerr << "C() constructor" << std::endl;
}
C(const C& tmp){
std::cerr << "C() copy constructor" << std::endl;
std::unique_ptr<A> _a(new A(*tmp.a));
std::unique_ptr<B> _b(new B(*tmp.b));
a = _a.release();
b = _b.release();
}
~C(){
std::cerr << "~B()" << std::endl;
}
A* a;
B* b;
};
int main(int argc, char** argv){
A a;
B b;
C c;
c.a = &a;
c.b = &b;
C c2(c);
return 0;
}
And the output for this code:
A() constructor
B() constructor
C() constructor
C() copy constructor
A() copy constructor
B() copy constructor
So, the question is why does A destructor not called?
As I suppose, std::unique_ptr<A> _a
will go out of the scope and object should be destroyed.
Stack unwinding is only guaranteed if the exception is ever caught. If you add a try-catch block to your main
, you will see that the destructors get called correctly.
[Live example]
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With