I’m trying to have a std::vector of a class I’ve defined, but I keep on getting the error: Call to implicitly deleted copy constructor. It says that the copy constructor is implicitly deleted because of a user-declared move constructor, but I haven’t done anything like that. The same thing occurs when I use a unique_ptr of the class.
It looks like it might be because: 13. Copy assignment operator of 'Booper' is implicitly deleted because field 'soundOscillator' has a deleted copy assignment operator (soundOscillator is a juce::dsp::Oscillator, and a member of Booper, the class which I want to have a vector of).
Seems the soundOscillator is not copyable.
The copy assignment operator is deleted.
This could for instance be because you added the JUCE_DECLARE_NON_COPYABLE or JUCE_DECLARE_NON_COPYABLE_WITH_LEAK_DETECTOR macros.
It is also the case if you inherit a class where this macro was used, which is the case for every juce::Component and many others.
And it is the case for any class, that has a member where the copy constructor was deleted, including std::unique_ptrs and std::atomic, unless you created a bespoke copy constructor, that deals with those members and create a clean copy if that is applicable for your use case.
When you assign a std::unique_ptr into a std::vector, you have to tell that the pointee shall be moved into the constructor, which in turn will invalidate the previous std::unique_ptr:
auto thing = std::make_unique<Thing>(); // thing has now a valid instance
std::vector<std::unique_ptr<Thing>> things;
things.push_back (std::move (thing)); // the Thing that thing was pointing to is now in the vector
thing->foo(); // not allowed, because thing is now empty
unique_ptr means, the Thing can only be owned at one place.
That makes sense, I tried it out and it did the trick. I’m still fairly new to C++ and not very familiar with this sort of thing yet, so thank you very much for the help!
