From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,bfcbd34f9610fd42
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!v10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada classwide copy vs C++ clone
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:00:17 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <185c1b11-6de8-49bf-9d77-8b4855cf2e76@v10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
References: <iv22if$9j0$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.3.40.82
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1309986017 30998 127.0.0.1 (6 Jul 2011 21:00:17
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 21:00:17 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: v10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.3.40.82;
 posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: HUALESNKRC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13,gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20107
Date: 2011-07-06T14:00:17-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Jul 6, 6:30=A0pm, "Alex R. Mosteo" <alejan...@mosteo.invalid> wrote:

> More reading late, my current conclusion is that I need to use the Clone
> pattern and implement a cloning method in every derived class.
>
> So, this is what I'd like to hear confirmed. Am I right?

Yes. This is also why you should *carefully* rethink the requirement
for having this operation in the whole hierarchy. It should not come
up by default.
Also, you will want to use boost::shared_ptr or something similar to
protect yourself from the pointer mess. Raw pointers are to be
avoided, even if pointer-related patterns have to be used.

--
Maciej Sobczak * http://www.msobczak.com * http://www.inspirel.com