Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost 1_58_0_b1_rc2 is available for testing
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-03-17 18:58:09

Steven Watanabe wrote:

> One of these has to fail:
> int ref(int&);
> int rref(int&&);
> boost::function<void(int)> f1(&ref);
> boost::function<void(int)> f2(&rref);
> I don't think there's any strong reason to support one over the other, so
> it's probably best to allow f1, since it used to be supported before
> rvalue references.

The rationale for supporting f1 was that

void f1( int x )
    return ref( x );

works, and this is what boost::function was, conceptually, trying to

Of course, this decision to allow f1(&ref) was made before rvalue
references. Nowadays one would argue that rref should be free to pilfer the
argument for efficiency.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at