Ion Gaztañaga wrote:
As some others have mentioned, I'd like to ask if Boost.Move and Boost.Container could meet the requirements for a Fast Track review (the Review Wizard has the last word according to the Boost Formal Process, but I'll like to see if there is consensus). Arguments:
Boost.Move
-> Only one header (move.hpp) -> Technique already in use in Boost (in several detail namespaces). This is a proposal for a common implementation. -> Boost-conformant implementation available in sandbox.
...
I'll be specially interested in pushing Move first, so that we could have move semantics for Boost 1.41.
+9 for this. But I have a question about Boost.Move: Because the problem Boost.Move addresses is so important, and Boost.Move wasn't around, my existent code uses efficient implementations of "swap" as a substitute. The documentation shows that Boost.Move can be used to implement an efficient swap. But what about the other direction? Can Boost.Move exploit an existent efficient swap? Regards, Thomas