Subject: Re: [boost] [variant] Please vote for behavior
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-01-30 20:37:38
on Wed Jan 30 2013, Paul Smith <pl.smith.mail-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
> What the language semantics are designed for, what the standard
> library guarantees and effectively requires, and what the committee
> seem to advocate for, are conservative move-semantics - ones that
> require that a moved-from object maintains its invariants (in the case
> of the library - its requirements).
An object always maintains its invariants during its lifetime.
> On the other hand we have destructive move-semantics,
In what sense are you claiming that we "have" destructive
move-semantics? Nobody has ever implemented or even fully-specified
destructive move semantics AFAIK. Destructive move semantics are (at
this time) nothing more than a fantasy some people have about what they
think would be a better world.
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing Software Development Training http://www.boostpro.com Clang/LLVM/EDG Compilers C++ Boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk