...
For example, in C++03, std::auto_ptr had the following copy operation signatures [ISO/IEC 14882-2003]:
| Copy constructor | auto_ptr(auto_ptr &A); |
| Copy assignment | auto_ptr& operator=(auto_ptr &A); |
Both copy construction and copy assignment would mutate the source argument, A, by effectively calling this->reset(A.release()). However, this invalidated assumptions made by standard library algorithms such as std::sort(), which may need to make a copy of an object for later comparisons [Hinnant 05]. Consider an implementation the following implementation of std::sort() that implements the quick sort algorithm:.
| Code Block |
|---|
// ... value_type pivot_element = *mid_point; // ... |
At this point, the sorting algorithm assumes that pivot_element and *mid_point have equivalent value representations and will compare equal. However, for std::auto_ptr, this is not the case because *mid_point has been mutated, and mutated and results in unexpected behavior.
In C++11, the std::unique_ptr smart pointer class was introduced as a replacement for std::auto_ptr to better specify the ownership semantics of pointer objects. Rather than mutate the source argument in a copy operation, std::unique_ptr explicitly deletes the copy constructor and copy assignment operator, and instead uses a move constructor and move assignment operator. Subsequently, std::auto_ptr was deprecated in C++11.
...
In this compliant solution, the copy operations for A no longer mutate the source operand, ensuring that the vector contains equivalent copies of obj. Instead, A has been given move operations that perform the mutation when it is safe to do so.
| Code Block | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
#include <algorithm>
#include <vector>
class A {
int m;
public:
A() : m(0) {}
explicit A(int m) : m(m) {}
A(const A &other) : m(other.m) {}
A(A &&other) : m(other.m) { other.m = 0; }
A& operator=(const A &other) {
if (&other != this) {
m = other.m;
}
return *this;
}
A& operator=(A &&other) {
m = other.m;
other.m = 0;
return *this;
}
int get_m() const { return m; }
};
void f() {
std::vector<A> v{10};
A obj(12);
std::fill(v.begin(), v.end(), obj);
} |
Exceptions
OOP58-CPP-EX0: Reference counting, and implementations such as std::shared_ptr<> constitute an exception to this rule. Any copy or assignment operation of a reference-counted object requires the reference count to be incremented. The semantics of reference counting are well-understood, and it can be argued that the reference count is not a salient part of the shared_pointer object.
Risk Assessment
Copy operations that mutate the source operand or global state can lead to unexpected program behavior. In the case of using Using such a type in a Standard Template Library container or algorithm , this can also lead to undefined behavior.
Rule | Severity | Likelihood | Detectable |
|---|
Repairable | Priority | Level | |
|---|---|---|---|
OOP58-CPP | Low | Likely | Yes |
No |
P6 | L2 |
Automated Detection
Tool | Version | Checker | Description |
|---|
| CodeSonar |
| LANG.FUNCS.COPINC | Copy Operation Parameter Is Not const | ||||||
| Helix QAC |
| C++4075 | |||||||
| Klocwork |
| CERT.OOP.COPY_MUTATES | |||||||
| Parasoft C/C++test |
| CERT_CPP-OOP58-a | Copy operations must not mutate the source object | ||||||
| Polyspace Bug Finder |
| CERT C++: OOP58-CPP | Checks for copy operation modifying source operand (rule partially covered) |
Related Vulnerabilities
Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the CERT website.
Related Guidelines
Bibliography
| [ISO/IEC 14882-2014] | Subclause 12.8, "Copying and Moving Class Objects" Table 21, "CopyConstructible Requirements" Table 23, "CopyAssignable Requirements" |
| [ISO/IEC 14882-2003] |
| [Hinnant |
| 2005] | "Rvalue Reference Recommendations for Chapter 20" |
...
...