This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [Patch]New feature to all kind of stl container.vector::data_move() returns vector::data() that can be moved,just as unique_ptr::release() to unique_ptr::get()
- From: Anthony Shipman <als at iinet dot net dot au>
- To: "libstdc++" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 04:27:31 +1100
- Subject: Re: [Patch]New feature to all kind of stl container.vector::data_move() returns vector::data() that can be moved,just as unique_ptr::release() to unique_ptr::get()
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <tencent_1737FA275BA843B20700F485 at qq dot com> <201501090219 dot 30548 dot als at iinet dot net dot au> <CAH6eHdRkpHMn7onGc8LS2HzL9siW_w17uyf-tOQ3uqk=DenKug at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Fri, 9 Jan 2015 02:52:42 am Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >> extern "C" void some_function(const int*, size_t);
> >> std::vector<int> get_values(size_t n);
> >> ...
> >> some_function(get_values(5).data(), 5);
> >>
> >> Today this works correctly. With your suggestion the call to data()
> >> would release ownership of the memory and it would never be freed.
> >
> > Why would this happen? Is there some sort of implied operator=(&&) for
> > the int* type?
>
> I don't understand the question. Why would what happen?
>
That the vector loses ownership of its data. When the vector is destroyed it
would release the memory with the data. What is the move method that would
take away ownership of the data if data() returned T*&& to some_function()?
--
Anthony Shipman Mamas don't let your babies
als@iinet.net.au grow up to be outsourced.