Why am I getting a segmentation fault?

[Marquis]

I assume it's something simple that I'm doing wrong, but I'd appreciate the help. Here's the Set class that I used. My main function did nothing but test the class.

#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;

template <class T>
class Set
{
public:
    Set();
    Set(Set<T>& setObject);
    void add(T addedValue);
    T* getArray();
    int getQuantity();
    void increaseCapacity();
    ~Set();
private:
    vector<T> items;
    int quantity;
};

template <class T>
Set<T>::Set() : quantity(0)
{
}

template <class T>
Set<T>::Set(Set<T>& setObject) : quantity(setObject.getQuantity())
{
    items.clear();
    T* object = setObject.getArray();
    for(int i = 0; i < quantity; i++)
    {
        items.push_back(object[i]);
    }
}

template <class T>
void Set<T>::add(T addedValue)
{
    items.push_back(addedValue);
    quantity = items.size();
}

template <class T>
T* Set<T>::getArray()
{
    return &items[0];
}

template <class T>
int Set<T>::getQuantity()
{
    return this->quantity;
}

template <class T>
Set<T>::~Set()
{
    if(!items.empty())
    {
        delete [] &items;
    }
}

[Peter87]

This is wrong delete [] &items;
The vector will clean up itself in the destructor so no need to do anything. Only delete what you create with new.

[Marquis]

Thanks, I appreciate it. So is there even a reason to have a ~Set() function in this class?

[Peter87]

no

[Moschops]

A destructor will be made; if not by you, by the compiler. If you've got nothing special you want to do in it, don't bother making one yourself.

[Marquis]

Understood. Thanks for the help, everyone.