Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

C++11 move constructor


What would be the correct way to implement a move constructor considering the following class:

class C { public:     C();     C(C&& c); private:     std::string string; } 

Of course, the idea is to avoid copying string or deallocating it twice.
Lets assume the basic example is just for clarity and I do need a move constructor.


I tried:

C::C(C&& c) {     //move ctor     string = std::move(c.string); } 

And

C::C(C&& c) : string(std::move(c.string)) {     //move ctor } 

Both compile fine on gcc 4.8 and run fine. It seems option A is the correct behaviour, string gets copied instead of moved with option B.
Is this the correct implementation of a move constructor?

like image 495
unexpectedvalue Avatar asked May 01 '12 18:05

unexpectedvalue


People also ask

What does the move constructor do?

A move constructor enables the resources owned by an rvalue object to be moved into an lvalue without copying.

What is the difference between move constructor and copy constructor?

If any constructor is being called, it means a new object is being created in memory. So, the only difference between a copy constructor and a move constructor is whether the source object that is passed to the constructor will have its member fields copied or moved into the new object.

What is move constructor and assignment operator?

A move constructor is executed only when you construct an object. A move assignment operator is executed on a previously constructed object. It is exactly the same scenario as in the copy case.

How do I turn off move constructor?

To correct this, remove the move constructor completely. In the case of the class, once a copy constructor is present (user defined), the move is implicitly not generated anyway (move constructor and move assignment operator).


1 Answers

Since std::string itself has a move-ctor, the implicitly defined move-ctor for C will take care of the proper move operation. You may not define it yourself. However, if you have any other data member and specifically:

12.8 Copying and moving class objects

12 An implicitly-declared copy/move constructor is an inline public member of its class. A defaulted copy- /move constructor for a class X is defined as deleted (8.4.3) if X has:

— a variant member with a non-trivial corresponding constructor and X is a union-like class,

— a non-static data member of class type M (or array thereof) that cannot be copied/moved because overload resolution (13.3), as applied to M’s corresponding constructor, results in an ambiguity or a function that is deleted or inaccessible from the defaulted constructor, or

— a direct or virtual base class B that cannot be copied/moved because overload resolution (13.3), as applied to B’s corresponding constructor, results in an ambiguity or a function that is deleted or inaccessible from the defaulted constructor, or

— for the move constructor, a non-static data member or direct or virtual base class with a type that does not have a move constructor and is not trivially copyable.

13 A copy/move constructor for class X is trivial if it is neither user-provided nor deleted and if

— class X has no virtual functions (10.3) and no virtual base classes (10.1), and functions (10.3) and no virtual base classes (10.1), and

— the constructor selected to copy/move each direct base class subobject is trivial, and

— for each non-static data member of X that is of class type (or array thereof), the constructor selected to copy/move that member is trivial; otherwise the copy/move constructor is non-trivial.

you may want to implement your own move-ctor.

In case you need the move-ctor, prefer the initializer list syntax. Always! Otherwise, you may end up with a default construction per object not mentioned in the initializer list (which is what you're forced for member objects with non-default ctors only).

like image 86
dirkgently Avatar answered Sep 17 '22 15:09

dirkgently