On Wed, 3 Sept 2025 at 12:12, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > > I want to also see following test being added, that explains why we want to > > use: > > std::forward<_Tp>(__p.second); > > Instead of, seemingly more obvious: > > std::move(__p).second -> this will produce int& instead of int&& > > Good idea. I think I should probably just extend the testcase to cover > every combination of lvalue/rvalue members, lvalue/rvalue pairs, and > const/non-const pairs.
If you could, also take a look at similar coverage for assignment operators and constructors. There was that recent misguided suggestion to replace forwards with moves; our implementation uses forward in assignments and constructors, but surely doesn't hurt to try to make sure the tests for those cover reference elements.
