Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Formal Review: Boost.Move
From: Daniel James (dnljms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-24 17:54:55
Sorry I haven't reviewed this in any depth. I have converted
Boost.Unordered to use this version and found it very easy to use. I'd
happily accept a slightly less elegant implementation (as suggested by
Steven) if it makes it more portable.
The optimised version passed all my tests, the unoptimised version
fails a couple of tests because it copies the container in some places
where the current version moves, but that's perfectly fine. IMO the
only essential features are to the ability to implement move only
types, and containers which take full advantage of movable types.
Compared to my adobe based move implementation, I think yours is
superior. It's easier to implement a movable class and it has better
I found the documentation very readable. As always, I'd like you to
mention the necessary header in the tutorial. If nothing else, an
'#include' in the first example would help. I think there's a typo in
'libs/move/doc/html/move/two_emulation_modes.html', under 'optimized
mode' you write 'needs to define a copy constructor for
copyable_and_movable' but the code is an assignment operator.
I vote to accept the library, fully accepting that the implementation
may change after the review.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk