MantisBT - Rosetta
View Issue Details
IDProjectCategoryView StatusDate SubmittedLast Update
0000228Rosetta[All Projects] Bad Codingpublic2013-03-22 17:022013-11-18 16:49
Reporterrmoretti 
Assigned Tormoretti 
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityalways
StatusresolvedResolutionfixed 
PlatformOSOS Version
Product VersionTrunk 
Fixed in Version 
Application(s) Affectedmany
Command Line Usedn/a
Developer Options
Fixed in SVN Version36c2c81b7794e1f70a9520da778b3239dc3757a5
Summary0000228: ScoreFunction cloning
DescriptionBecause of the distinction between ScoreFunction and SymmetricScoreFunction (as well as the other ScoreFunction subclasses), you should never use the copy constructor of ScoreFunction() to make a new copy of a ScoreFunction. Use scorefxn.clone() instead.

Note there's no drawback to this, even if you know that you have a true ScoreFunction.
Steps To ReproduceTo find potential violators:

egrep -R 'new[[:space:]]*ScoreFunction[[:space:]]*\([^)]' rosetta/rosetta_source/src

Additional InformationCommand currently finds 66 instances. Some are valid, like the 7 in will and neil's apps/pilot directories, which are explicitly intended to take a symmetric scorefunction and asymmetrize it. Most of the rest are probably latent bugs.

They'll need to be checked manually, though.
TagsNo tags attached.
Relationships
Attached Files
Issue History
Date ModifiedUsernameFieldChange
2013-03-22 17:02rmorettiNew Issue
2013-03-22 17:25smlewisNote Added: 0000210
2013-03-22 17:28SergeyNote Added: 0000211
2013-03-24 19:03rmorettiNote Added: 0000212
2013-11-18 16:49rmorettiFixed in SVN Version => 36c2c81b7794e1f70a9520da778b3239dc3757a5
2013-11-18 16:49rmorettiStatusnew => resolved
2013-11-18 16:49rmorettiResolutionopen => fixed
2013-11-18 16:49rmorettiAssigned To => rmoretti

Notes
(0000210)
smlewis   
2013-03-22 17:25   
Is there a future in privatizing the copy operator to force people to use clone? I am guessing not from your notes.
(0000211)
Sergey   
2013-03-22 17:28   
As Steven suggested: How about declare copy constructor and copy operator as private and never define them? That way it will be impossible to copy without clone.
(0000212)
rmoretti   
2013-03-24 19:03   
If we provide a new method for those few people who explicitly want to convert a scorefunction to the base class (with a name that makes it clear that's what they're doing), I think making the copy constructor private might work.