LGTM (+Lang who wrote the AssignmentMemcpyizer, if I recall correctly, in case he has any thoughts on this)
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Nick Lewycky <[email protected]> wrote: > The implicit definition provided for the move assignment operator doesn't > take advantage of the memcpy'izer like the copy assignment operator does. > > It turns out that the AssignmentMemcpyizer will work perfectly with no > changes. The decision for whether a field is memcpy'able is the same for > copy and move assignment, and in the case where something isn't memcpy'able > it falls back to generic EmitStmt on the synthesized AST, which will be > calling the member's move-assignment or copy-assignment operator as > appropriate. > > (What about move constructors? Those are CXXConstructorDecl's and end up > in EmitConstructorBody as appropriate.) > > Patch attached, please review! > > Nick > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
