STL container of auto_ptr

[Boston]

my version of the STL has the following documentation:

You can pass an auto_ptr<Type> object by value as an argument to a function
call. You can return such an object by value as well. Both operations depend
on the implicit construction of intermediate objects of class
auto_ptr<Type>::auto_ptr_ref<Other>, by various subtle conversion rules. You
cannot, however, reliably manage a sequence of auto_ptr<Type> objects with a
Standard Template Library container.

Is this restriction against having, say, a vector of auto_ptr normal? If
so, why?

 

[Alf P. Steinbach]

* Boston:

Is this restriction against having, say, a vector of auto_ptr normal?

It's in the standard, if that's what you're asking.

If so, why?

Technically because a std:.atuo_ptr is not a copyable object. Standard
containers require copyable objects. They copy things around.

 

[Boston]

* Boston:

It's in the standard, if that's what you're asking.



Technically because a std:.atuo_ptr is not a copyable object. Standard
containers require copyable objects. They copy things around.

Ah, because if you copy the auto_ptr, the source sets its ptr to NULL,
therefore it couldn't be const&. I understand now, thanks.