-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 05/03/2010 01:45 PM, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
And I wonder about "return BOOST_XINT_MOVE(p);" instead of "return p;" and let the compiler optimise the return via NRVO...
Does NRVO work with emulated move semantics? I was under the impression that it couldn't, but I could well be wrong, Boost.Move is new to me.
RVO works independently of (emulated) move semantics. [...] One of the main things (emulated) move semantics gives you is the ability to overload functions on lvalue or (emulated) rvalue reference, giving you the opportunity to capture temporaries and pilfer/reuse their resources.
If that's the case, and GCC is doing that as it should, why would adding move semantics to the library provide any speed increase at all? - -- Chad Nelson Oak Circle Software, Inc. * * * -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvfEdgACgkQp9x9jeZ9/wTyYwCgvZRT5YsK8VK+KRCVXUVItpGU gdwAnjLqM+6VHby5Cw9B6bdQ2BUJgmUN =wV3I -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----