----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/66608/#review201226 -----------------------------------------------------------
3rdparty/stout/include/stout/hashmap.hpp Line 104 (original), 104 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/66608/#comment282359> Reading https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21035417/is-the-pass-by-value-and-then-move-construct-a-bad-idiom, I'm not sure what types are usually used as `Value`s in hashmaps. Are they expensive to move? Are they expensive to copy? Can we say that you suggestion is a strict improvement? Or at least a reasonable trade-off? I'm asking because I don't have neither enough experience nor data to make a decision. - Alexander Rukletsov On April 13, 2018, 1:09 p.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/66608/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated April 13, 2018, 1:09 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Alexander Rukletsov and Michael Park. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > While it was already possible to create a `hashmap` over move-only > values, we still performed a copy in `put`, making it hard to > dynamically add elements with the expected stout semantics. > > This patch releases the requirements on the value argument to `put` so > that instead of copyable we now only require move-constructible. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/stout/include/stout/hashmap.hpp > 91085b8d8ad5d35c39c8cc95e3d4765d82d9a8db > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/66608/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > `make check` > > > Thanks, > > Benjamin Bannier > >
