Re: [boost] [Review] Formal Review: Boost.Move

Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Formal Review: Boost.Move
From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-31 11:42:16

On 31/05/2010 8:46, Thomas Klimpel wrote:
> The alternative is to just define "TYPE&  operator=(TYPE t)", but Ion
> doesn't like this for classes like boost::container::vector, as this
> copy assignment operator cannot reuse existing resources. So his
> proposed non-optimized mode sacrificed move-assign from temporaries
> on C++03 compilers, to avoid non-optimal code on new compilers in
> C++0x mode.

Yes. I missed that for some classes operator=(TYPE t) might be optimal 
both for copy assignment and move assignment so that option should be 
available in documentation for those that want to use it, since it 
offers both optimal performance and no side-effects on enclosing classes.

Best,

Ion