Subject: Re: [boost] C++03 unique_ptr emulation
From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-09 15:15:51
David Abrahams wrote:
> So you're saying, in other words, that "move(x)" really means "you have
> permission to move x" but the one I proposed would mean "move it, now."
>
> OK, good point.
>
> So what about this horrible little proposal?
>
> template <class T>
> struct rv<T> : T
> {
> private:
> rv();
> ~rv();
> rv(rv const&);
> void operator=(rv const&);
> };
>
> template <class T>
> boost::enable_if<is_class<T>, rv<T>&>
> move(T& x)
> {
> return static_cast<rv<T>& >(x);
> }
>
> Does that solve any problems?
How can that work? What would you need to add to T? Disable non-const
copy constructor?
> Yeah, I know it's not theoretically portable, but it should be portable
> in practice. Especially when it comes to emulating language features, I
> care less and less about the letter of the law :-)
I would be really interested in this proposal.
Regards,
Ion