Re: Automatially move from $n (was: C++11 move semantics)

[Frank Heckenbach]

Hans Åberg wrote:

> > If semantic_type doesn't have a "*" operator of its own, this might
> > work (but look confusing). However, I use the variant (so I'd need
> > this function for each alternative, which might be possible to do
> > with templates), but some of my semantic values are (smart)
> > pointers, so "*" is already used (and even if I could somehow
> > override it, it would suggest dereferencing rather than moving).
> 
> Alternative unary operators are listed as point 3 at [1]. One can
> overload operator&, but is more confusing than *, as it disables
> taking the address-of.

Yeah; all existing operators have their meaning, and might apply to
some or all alternatives one might use. C++ doesn't allow defining
new operators (probably for good reasons), and I'm generally wary of
overloading operators for unrelated purposes (don't already like the
stream "<<" and ">>" too much).

> > Now, if C++ had a dedicated move operator (which would also be
> > useful in other code) ... But (ab)using an existing operator seems
> > confusing to me.
> 
> Or a shorter name.

Well, with "using std::move" it's a bit shorter (just "move ($n)"),
but still too much clutter for my taste.

Regards,
Frank