This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [patch] : RFC : rvalue / move symantics
- From: Jonathan Wakely <cow at compsoc dot man dot ac dot uk>
- To: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>
- Cc: Chris Jefferson <caj at cs dot york dot ac dot uk>, libstdc++ <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:55:14 +0000
- Subject: Re: [patch] : RFC : rvalue / move symantics
- References: <4238BFF0.60007@cs.york.ac.uk> <423EF9F8.3080006@suse.de>
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 05:44:40PM +0100, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Serious objections anyone?!? Otherwise, I'm going to apply the patch to
> v7-branch (after an additional round of testing) and proceed with these
> exciting improvements...
I'm afraid I've not had time to apply this patch and play with it,
despite being very interested in it.
Just a quick question, which I'd been meaning to check for myself ...
+ template<class _Tp>
+ struct __rvalref
+ {
+ _Tp& __ref;
+ __rvalref(_Tp& __inref) : __ref(__inref) { }
+ };
Could that ctor be explicit? If it's only ever constructed explicitly
by a call to __move_helper<_Tp>::__move() then it could be, but I
haven't looked long enough to know if that's true.
Obviously, whatever the answer to my question is it's not a reason to
reject Chris' patch.
jon
--
Let's remember that, fun though technology may be, it's not the important stuff.
- James Dennet