Talk:Rule of three (C++ programming)
Appearance
![]() | Computing Stub‑class ![]() | ||||||||||||
|
![]() | C/C++ Unassessed | |||||||||
|
Disambiguation
- One of the references says Op. cit. - but which of the two others is meant?
- copy assignment operator = copy constructor?
--Abdull (talk) 23:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've attempted to WP:DAB the citation and I've updated Assignment operator in C++ to distinguish it from the copy constructor. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 19:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Singleton?
In my opinion the singleton design pattern isn't relevant here, the rule of three is meant to prevent bugs of oversight and not enforcing semantics (such as "only one" singleton).
Additionally as far as I know a private destructor is not part of the singleton pattern.