On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 12:09 +0000, Chris Vine wrote: > On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 08:39:46 +0100 > Murray Cumming <murr...@murrayc.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 2014-12-28 at 15:42 +0100, Christof Meerwald wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > just wondering if anyone has given any thought on C++11 features for > > > gtkmm. > > > > > > One thing that seems very unfortunate is that all objects are > > > non-movable (due to them being explicitly made non-copyable which > > > then also deletes the move constructor). > > [snip] > > > > I believe it's possible to make classes movable but not copyable. That > > feels strange to me, but maybe that's just because I'm not using C++11 > > day to day. I hope that this wouldn't lead to code that looked too > > much like the widgets were being copied. I can imagine a lot of > > confusion from less experienced coders. > > It is possible (the canonical example is of course std::unique_ptr) and > it does not confuse, because lvalues can only be moved by converting > them to rvalues, in other words by calling std::move on them. Calling > std::move makes it clear, I think, that no copying is involved.
Does anyone see any need for this in gtkmm? In theory, I guess we could make Gtk::Widget movable but not copyable, so we could do things like this sometimes: Gtk::Widget widget = generate_some_widget(); But I think that would be very confusing. -- Murray Cumming murr...@murrayc.com www.murrayc.com _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list gtkmm-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
