32 ms·

The implicitly-declared copy constructor is deleted if there is a user-defined move constructor. See: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/copy_constructo

The implicitly-declared copy constructor is deleted if there is a user-defined move constructor. See: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/copy_constructor#Deleted_implicitly-declared_copy_constructor https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/copy_constructor#... So if you define a move constructor and still want your class to have a copy constructor, you'll have to explicitly define the copy constructor, too.

mikec3010 8y ago
That makes sense, and hence the "rule of 5" (if you don't want it implicitly deleted). Thanks.
microtherion 8y ago
Luckily, in modern C++, defining the copy constructor in this case (where you just want to make the default available) is as simple as: A::A(const A &other) = default;