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

Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Formal Review: Boost.Move
From: Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. (jhellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-31 15:06:25

On 5/31/2010 4:55 AM, Thomas Klimpel wrote:
> Jeffrey Lee Hellrung wrote:
>> Ah, okay, I was thinking of the distinction between the 2
>> move emulation modes described in the proposed Boost.Move
>> documentation, neither of which use a copy assignment
>> operator with signature operator=(const T&).
>
> The description of the non-optimized mode in
> <http://igaztanaga.drivehq.com/libs/move/doc/html/move/two_emulation_modes.html>
> says "Users can use the usual copy-assignment or the compiler-generated one". This is exactly the copy assignment operator with signature "T&  operator=(const T&)". The text goes on to explicitly say "But this emulation mode does not optimize the non-const rvalue move assignment example". This is what I mean by "breaking move-assignment from temporaries for the non-optimized mode".

This is what I get for failing to properly review the documentation.  I 
seem to remember that in previous discussions of the library, 
non-optimized move emulation used an operator=(T), so that at least 
rvalues were properly captured in practice.  Now the terminology has 
changed (at least for me :/ )

- Jeff