[boost] Re: Zero Unnecessary Temporary Objects: A Revolution

From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-12 06:40:24

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
[...]
> > > class T
> > > {
> > >     ...
> > >     T& operator=(const T& rhs)
> > >     {
> > >         T copy(rhs);
> > >         rhs.swap(*this);
> > >         return *this;
> > >     }
> > > };
> 
> By the way again :o), here there's an obvious typo in my original posting:
> it's copy.swap, not rhs.swap.
> 
> > If you've been talking with Scott Meyers recently you might already
> > know that I certainly agree about operator= for lots of reasons.
> 
> Cool. My point is, even when one wants to implement the copy-and-swap idiom,
> the implementation above is the worst that could possibly be written.

Uhmm, care to elaborate, Andrei? I quite often do: < kinda >

T& operator=(T temp) throw()
{ return this->swap(temp); }

What's wrong with it (other than "way too strong" argument, please)?

regards,
alexander.