Re: [boost] Boost.Convert. Take 2.

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Convert. Take 2.
From: Vladimir Batov (vb.mail.247_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-02-21 15:16:52

> Rob Stewart <robertstewart <at> comcast.net> writes:
>>>> ...
>>> However,  for non-movable types,  the fallback is to copy anyway,
>>> so both should be moved. 
>> ...
>>... if value_or() moves/destroys the string inside "res",
>>... then "res" is not usable from here downwards
>>... it's a problem, isn't it?
> 
> I should have been clearer. If the argument is movable, move it. If not,
> don't. That means overloading based
> upon rvalue references vs. lvalue vs. small, by-value args. I was just
> showing the one case. 

Yes, now that you mention moveable-based overloading I understand. Sorry for
being thick... If "convert" gets go-ahead, I'll certainly need help with
C++11 stuff... as from what I gather (in particular Meyer's ruminations
about universal references, etc) it sounds outright complicated. 

Damn, gmane, forces me to trim almost all quoted text...