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...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk