Revised the Vector constructor

[GoogleCodeExporter]

While calling the constructor of the vector with size 0, it gives an
ambiguous result. Is it appropriate? Or can it be solved.

Vector p(0);

mincut_test.cpp:35: error: call of overloaded ‘BasicVector(int)’ is 
ambiguous


Also, the default constructor seems give a segfault.

Vector p;
p.print();


I think it should be mentioned in the documentation. Or adding a null state
vector support.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by lau65...@gmail.com on 10 Jul 2009 at 6:44

[GoogleCodeExporter]

The problem is 0 can be either an integer or a NULL pointer.

The default constructor shouldn't be called. Use Vector::n() instead.

Original comment by kennytm@gmail.com on 10 Jul 2009 at 11:49

[GoogleCodeExporter]

So let me find some method to solve it.

Original comment by lau65...@gmail.com on 10 Jul 2009 at 4:41

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Can you block the use of default constructor for non-friend class? Or you may 
change
it to initialize a vector of zero size.

It always create a potential trap of segmentation fault.

Original comment by lau65...@gmail.com on 11 Jul 2009 at 7:10

[GoogleCodeExporter]

The Vector now allow the pass of Vector(0) with int type. I think it is what we 
want,
you may check about the use of it.

I don't know whether the trick is support by all compile or it is standard. 
Check
int_ptr_overload.cpp

Original comment by lau65...@gmail.com on 11 Jul 2009 at 7:14

[GoogleCodeExporter]

@4:

Is that r104 & r105?

Original comment by kennytm@gmail.com on 24 Jul 2009 at 3:11

[GoogleCodeExporter]

r105, I just change the long to int and it works.

Original comment by lau65...@gmail.com on 25 Jul 2009 at 3:58