Is it necessary to define move constructors from different classes?

前端 未结 2 2028
别那么骄傲
别那么骄傲 2021-02-20 05:55

Consider the following:

struct X
{
    Y y_;

    X(const Y & y) :y_(y) {}    
    X(Y && y) :y_(std::move(y)) {}
};

Is it necessar

2条回答
  •  鱼传尺愫
    2021-02-20 06:16

    Yes, but no. Your code should just be this:

    struct X
    {
        Y y_;
    
        X(Y y) : // either copy, move, or elide a Y
        y_(std::move(y)) // and move it to the member
        {} 
    };
    

    If you ever say in design "I need my own copy of this data"*, then you should just take the argument by value and move it to where it needs to be. It isn't your job to decide how to construct that value, that's up to the available constructors for that value, so let it make that choice, whatever it is, and work with the end result.

    *This applies to functions too, of course, for example:

    void add_to_map(std::string x, int y) // either copy, move or elide a std::string
    {
        // and move it to where it needs to be
        someMap.insert(std::make_pair(std::move(x), y));
    }
    

    Note that is applied in C++03 too, somewhat, if a type was default constructible and swappable (which is all moving does anyway):

    // C++03
    struct X
    {
        std::string y_;
    
        X(std::string y) // either copy or elide a std::string
        {
            swap(y_, y); // and "move" it to the member
        } 
    };
    

    Though this didn't seem to be as widely done.

提交回复
热议问题