On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 04:59:49 +0300, Michel Fortin <[email protected]> wrote:

Well, if

        a ~= S();

does result in a temporary which get copied and then destroyed, why have move semantics at all? Move semantics are not just an optimization, they actually change the semantics.

There was a similar discussion on struct constructors which ended up something like this, that it is an optimization.
I fully agree it is not, move exists just the reasons like this.

Reply via email to