On 7 Sep 2009, at 22:56, David Abrahams wrote:
on Mon Sep 07 2009, David Abrahams <dave-AT-boostpro.com> wrote:
Hi Ion,
A few things I noticed looking through move.hpp in the sandbox
Also, I wonder if the algorithms in move.hpp shouldn't use move_iterator and dispatch to the ones in std::? As it is, they'll miss optimizations that may be in the library such as loop unrolling, and this seems like a good opportunity to offload code and maintenance work.
The rvalue-enabled libstdc++ has still further optimizations, e.g. using memcpy where with move_iterators wrapped around pointers to PODs, etc., but while that's an efficiency win, trying to do something like that would also increase your code size, so maybe you don't want to.
Very sorry I haven't looked at move.hpp, I'll try to if I had time. I'd hoped the move simulation would, in a compiler which supported everything natively, just use proper rvalue-references and the compiler's rvalue-aware standard library and containers, so it could be used just as a bridge until rvalue support was standard. Is that not the case? Chris