Code review comment for lp:~kaaveeacs/drizzle/privatized-members-of-NestedJoin

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:13 AM, Monty Taylor <email address hidden> wrote:
> and has actually found bugs before. On the other hand, there is no
> particular benefit that we've found to relaxing warnings or ignoring
> best practices.

In this case I was wondering why those members were being default
initialized. To me, that's unnecessary so I was thinking something
strange was going on.

> It's one of the things that makes us special and fun!
>
> In the case of this particular warning, if we could get to the point
> where we could enable it, warning about missing data members in
> initialization list can help to catch things that you forgot to
> initialize. It also warns about classes with pointer members which don't
> define a copy constructor or an operator= - which is quite dangerous.

Not really, unless it's a ptr to a resource owned by that class.

--
Olaf