on Thu Jan 31 2013, Paul Smith <pl.smith.mail-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Antony Polukhin <antoshkka@gmail.com> wrote:
From theoretical point of view you are absolutely correct, and my example is lame. Moreover, current implementation of move assignment and move constructors for recursive_wrapper were implemented to model that behavior.
Just pointing out that move assignment is not affected by this discussion. Everything is already allocated so it's as efficient as a pointer swap.
Actually the correct semantics of move assignment is the same as "swap + clear" if there's an empty state. See http://cpp-next.com/archive/2009/09/your-next-assignment/ I recommend reading the whole article. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing Software Development Training http://www.boostpro.com Clang/LLVM/EDG Compilers C++ Boost