On 11/05/2010 8:48, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
In my opinion, *the* primary goal of this library is to provide a standardized convention by which data structures and algorithms within and outside of boost can make use of move semantics in c++03 (there is already such a convention in c++0x).
The aim is also to provide a portable syntax between C++0x and C++03 compilers, that's why I consider the macros necessary. I would like to offer a syntax any novice could easily understand. I also understand your position when you say:
This means, for example, that, as an author of some class, I am not restricted to using the macros provided by this library to enable move emulation, or the forwarding functions this library provides, or whatever else, if they don't meet my requirements.
but I, as a writer of an algorithm, would like to know how the emulation works and what should I expect when assigning temporary copyable and movable classes. If the performance depends on the emulation used by the author, maybe I can't design the algorithm optimal for both C++0x and C++03.
I believe an itemization of the nitty-gritty requirements that a class must satisfy to be move-aware will encourage alternative, more targeted methods to enable move emulation while remaining inter-compatible with each other.
As long as they are compatible, there is no problem, but I think having a C++0x-like syntax for move emulation is positive. Maybe both approaches should be available, the macro-based one for average users without forbidding the use of alternative approaches. Thanks for your comments, best, Ion