I think you're correct. To fix, the clone operation would have to ensure the ref count stays the same, but I don't think that is the right thing to do in the general case. Cloning means you have an extra something that is making a reference to your data, and that extra something means an additional ref count.
"There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.
In reply to Re: Cloning (weak) references
by hardburn
in thread Cloning (weak) references
by Tomte
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |