Background: in C++, one-argument constructors are implicit.
What this means is that given this class declaration:
class Foo {
public:
Foo(int arg);
passAFoo(const Foo& arg);
};
This bit of C++:
Foo foo(5);
foo.passAFoo(10);
will compile and construct a temporary Foo that it passes to passAFoo.
This can be a pretty serious footgun, especially in cases when the
constructor is passed a pointer and takes ownership of that pointer:
accidentally passing a pointer where an object of is expected will do
bad things.
So I'd like to propose that our C++ style require one-arg constructors
to be marked explicit unless there's a clear comment explaining why the
constructor is implicit.
Thoughts?
-Boris
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
