On Tuesday, 18 October 2016 at 20:22:58 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 10/18/2016 04:15 PM, Atila Neves wrote:
I think I get it; I'm just not sure given the comments that
pop up in
the forum. Isn't one of the main reasons distinguishing
between these two?
void fun(ref const Foo);
void fun(Foo);
If they can't be distinguished, you don't get move semantics
"for free".
That's right, thanks Atila. -- Andreu
Actually thinking it over some more, you would be able to
distinguish it. You would simply treat func(Foo) to be the
equivalent of func(Foo&&) in C++.
void func(ref const Foo);
void func(Foo);
enum ctfeFoo = Foo();
func(ctfeFoo); // calls func(ref const Foo);
// zero reason to do a move as enum's can't house
runtime values
const Foo foo;
func(foo); // calls func(ref const Foo);
func(Foo()); // calls func(Foo)
// no ambiguity, same reason there isn't one for
C++'s &&
// Foo() is modifiable temporary
import std.algorithms.mutation : move;
Foo rfoo;
func(move(rfoo)); // calls func(Foo)
So now you would be able to define a single function to take both
rvalues and lvalues.
