Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!netcom!sjsumcs!horstman
From: horstman@mathcs.sjsu.edu (Cay Horstmann)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Smart pointers and stupid people (was: garbage collection...)
Message-ID: <1991Mar3.201701.17707@mathcs.sjsu.edu>
Date: 3 Mar 91 20:17:01 GMT
References: <49285@apple.Apple.COM> <27C19834.162A@tct.uucp> <4186@lupine.NCD.COM>
Organization: San Jose State University - Math/CS Dept.
Lines: 27

In article <4186@lupine.NCD.COM> rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette) writes:
>
>I think that there may have been some misunderstanding regarding the true
>meaning of my statement to the effect that C++ objects don't move.
>
>When I said that C++ objects don't move, I meant that they do not move
>just like memory locations themselves do not move.  Sure, you can copy
>the *contents* of one location to another, but I have yet to see any
(cute stuff deleted)>
>Likewise, given some C++ code like:
>
>		{
>		    SOME_TYPE some_object;
>
>		    //...
>		    //...
>		}
>
>I think that it is fairly clear that `some_object' resides in one (and only
>one) place throughout its lifetime.  That's true even if you copy its
>*contents* into some other object.
>
In C, objects can move. A typical scenario is to malloc an array of structs
(X* p = malloc( sizeof(X) * n )), fill it and later realloc. The same 
behavior occurs in a C++ variable array class. 

Cay