We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Currently the ~Obj destructor is generated unconditionally and is defined as (sketched)
~Obj
~Obj() { // deal with OneToManyRelations and VectorMembers // deal with OneToManyRelations }
Hence, if there are no relations defined for a datatype it could simply be declared as
virtual ~Obj() = default;
instead of implementing an empty destructor.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The assignment operator for the user facing classes could make use of the "copy-and-swap" idiom.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.
Currently the
~Obj
destructor is generated unconditionally and is defined as (sketched)Hence, if there are no relations defined for a datatype it could simply be declared as
instead of implementing an empty destructor.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: