On Saturday, 22 October 2016 at 22:05:54 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2016 23:13:28 Timon Gehr via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
I'm ready to participate (but I can't invest too much time at
the moment). Are we going with @rvalue ref?
That would certainly be my preference - at least out of what's
been discussed thus far.
- Jonathan M Davis
With move semantics in mind, I'm wondering if there may be a
better word.
Currently in D, IIRC, explicit moving can be done through
by-value arguments. If you want to move explicitly from an
lvalue, you can use D's std.move(lvalue). The downside is an
extra blit/init into the rvalue that's returned by std.move.
Then, the function that takes the rvalue may blit again in order
to store the contents that are being moved in.
As an alternative, non-const '@rvalue ref param' could be
used...but would it be clear enough to people(seeing non-const
@rvalue) that the contents of the argument could potentially be
consumed/moved-from?
