I implemented a class to handle some external functions (e.g of another DLL). This functions gives me an integer I can use as a handle. Here is the important part of my code:
MyClass
{
public:
MyClass() {
handle = getHandlefromExternalFunction();
}
~MyClass {
if(handle>0)
freeHandleFromExternalFunction(handle);
}
MyClass& operator=(MyClass& other) {
freeHandleFromExternalFunction(handle);
handle = other.handle
other.handle = 0; //Is this a bad idea?
}
private:
int handle;
}
In my main function I have an object of myClass. At some point I am using the assignement operator to change the values of the object:
MyClass object;
//some code
object = MyClass();
After assignement the object created by MyClass()
is immediatly destroyed since it gets out of scope. But I don't want freeHandleFromExternalFunction()
to be called on that handle
, since I am using it in the assigned object. Therefor I change the value of the assigned object in the assignement operator handle = 0
. My question is: Is this a bad idea? Has anybody a better solution for my problem?
Yes it's a bad idea. You don't normally expect the right-hand side of an assignment to be modified.
If you want to move ownership then use the "move" assignment operator together with std::move
:
MyClass& operator=(MyClass&& other) { ... }
// ...
MyClass a = ...;
MyClass b;
b = std::move(a);
If you only want movement like this (where the can be only one owner of the contained resource), then I also suggest you mark the copy-constructor and copy-assignment operators as deleted:
MyClass& operator=(MyClass const&) = delete;
MyClass(MyClass const&) = delete;
And following the rule of five don't forget the move-constructor and destructor:
~MyClass() { ... }
MyClass(MyClass&& other) { ... }