Why in this example
struct Foo {
atomic<int> x = 1;
};
the compiler (gcc 4.8) is trying to use the atomic& operator=(const atomic&)
which is deleted, (hence the example wont compile), while here
struct Bar {
Bar() { x = 1; }
atomic<int> x;
};
it is calling the int operator=(int)
as expected?
PS: I already know that
struct Xoo {
atomic<int> x{1};
};
is fine (anyhow the better way to init x
), but I am still curious about why Foo
is broken.
PS: I misread the compiler error (and forgot to include it in the quesiton). It actually says:
error: use of deleted function ‘std::atomic<int>::atomic(const std::atomic<int>&)’
std::atomic<int> x = 1;
^
[...] error: declared here
atomic(const atomic&) = delete;
^
so my above statement "...is trying to use the atomic& operator=(const atomic&)
was just plain wrong.
std::atomic<int> x = 1;
is copy-initialisation, and basically does this:
std::atomic<int> x{std::atomic<int>{1}};
Your compiler actually doesn't complain about operator=
, but instead about the copy constructor.
(As you've pointed out, a later operator=
call works just fine.)
Do a normal initialisation:
std::atomic<int> x{1};