this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2023
9 points (100.0% liked)

C++

324 readers
1 users here now

A place for C++ programmers discuss articles and news about programming in C++ and the language itself

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
9
The move constructor that you have to declare, even though you don't want anyone to actually call it - The Old New Thing (devblogs.microsoft.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think you should never std::move return values. Afaik every modern compiler does NRVO and manually moving prevents it. And on the offchance you need to use a compiler that optimizes less, that one copy most likely is the least of the performance concerns.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Afaik every modern compiler does NRVO and manually moving prevents it.

Yeah this is what bothers me. std::move could make things worse, but not if the alternative is a copy. But you're probably right that any self-respecting compiler nowadays would do NRVO.