Skip to content

Conversation

@Hailios
Copy link
Contributor

@Hailios Hailios commented Jun 13, 2019

No description provided.

@scheibel
Copy link
Member

Thanks for this PR. I like adding move semantics where applicable.
I see you only add them when passing them to the next function. Wouldn't we have to change signatures to accept rvalue references as well?

@Hailios
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hailios commented Jun 16, 2019

Thanks for this PR. I like adding move semantics where applicable.
I see you only add them when passing them to the next function. Wouldn't we have to change signatures to accept rvalue references as well?

My intent was to utilize move semantics without changing any signatures. Meaning, I just added it where I felt that it was safe for sure.
More use of move semantics can probably be implemented, but would of course require more work as well.

To answer your question, it is not neccessary to add rvalue signatures for the cases I changed.
What I did was to avoid one copy, and changing the signature to take rvalues could avoid one more copy (the copy to the by-value parameter).

@scheibel scheibel merged commit f9481ee into cginternals:master Apr 15, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants