Il 20/05/19 20:36, André Pönitz ha scritto:
I actually think we should consider getting rid of shared_null and instead have d == nullptr as the null/default constructed state of the object. Yes, that means we need to check for d == nullptr in member functions, but I don’t think the overhead is a problem, as d will have to be loaded into a register in any case.In case someone submits such change I'd appreciate some performance checking.
Not related to this email, but: please, we're switching from _what_ we want to _how_ we get it.
I understand the two are very tied (given the implicit sharing), but it seems to me that we are not agreeing on what a move constructor should do in the first place?
Thanks, -- Giuseppe D'Angelo | [email protected] | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
smime.p7s
Description: Firma crittografica S/MIME
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
