Den sön 28 okt. 2018 kl 13:32 skrev Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development <development@qt-project.org>: > > Il 28/10/18 11:22, Elvis Stansvik ha scritto: > > Though hmm, even if we'd lose move-construction, for the copy we'd get > > instead, wouldn't copy elision kick in and elide it? So we wouldn't > > have to pay for the ref count up/down? > > GCE is one thing, and applies in a very specific case (returning a > prvalue). > > (N)RVO is another thing, and may or may not be applied depending on > whether the compiler *can* apply it and *will* apply it. > > In the general case, you won't have either, and thus having a move will > be cheaper than a copy. Returning const objects for types which benefit > from moves is a bad idea.
Ah yes of course, my bad. Elvis > > My 2 c, > > -- > Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development