C++ : Why is the copy constructor not trivial just because there is a user defined destructor?
C++ : Why is the copy constructor not trivial just because there is a user defined destructor?
To Access My Live Chat Page,
On Google, Search for "hows tech developer connect"
I promised to share a hidden feature with you, and here it is.
This is a YouTube's feature which works on Desktop.
First, Make sure the video is currently in playing mode.
Then, type the letters 'awesome' on the keyboard.
Your YouTube progress indicator will turn into a shimmering rainbow.
Allow me to introduce myself briefly,
Hello, I am Delphi.
I am here to assist you in getting the answers you need.
C++ : Why is the copy constructor not trivial just because there is a user defined destructor?
I am available to answer your more detailed queries via comments or chat.
Please feel free to leave a comment below if you have an answer or insights on the answer.
Your answer will be appreciated and acknowledged with a 'heart' from me.
constructor not destructor? copy defined because is is the there trivial Why user just a C++ :