El 26/08/2014 23:36, Peter Dimov escribió:
Ion Gaztañaga wrote:
Evidently, if tests are finer grained separated then we can push Boost.Move out of many tests. In any case, it will be included by boost/move/unique_ptr.hpp ;-)
This is an implementation detail. We may decide (either now or at some point in the future) to not include Boost.Move in C++11 mode at all in unique_ptr.hpp. And if we do that, it will help if we test whether both
p1 = std::move( p2 );
and
p1 = boost::move( p2 );
work (the former in C++11 mode, the latter in both 03 and 11 with appropriate #include <move/core_utility.hpp>.)
We can execute the test with some macro specifying (in C++11) if we want to test it using boost move or not. That would cover both C++11 and Boost.Move users writing portable C+++03/C++11 code.
Stated differently, I want boost::unique_ptr, on a C++11 compiler, to work without any inclusion or mention of Boost.Move in user code, if that's what the user wants (even though it wouldn't make much sense to not use std::unique_ptr there except perhaps for the <T[N]> extension, but still.)
That's possible at this moment, although it is not being tested.
Something I missed in my post is that I think that default_delete should be in its own header (and its test should be named default_delete_test.)
While I haven't split this into another header, the latest commit, removes the array specialization, tidies doxygen macros with other macro utilities and the readability of the implementation has been improved as the header has much less code: https://github.com/boostorg/move/blob/develop/include/boost/move/unique_ptr.... unique_ptr is also now constructible and assignable from zero in c++03 code. Tested in several GCC, MSVC and Clang versions, both in C++03 and C++11 modes. I won't have time in the following days to continue working in your proposed changes, but at least I wanted to to show that we've progressed a bit. Best, Ion