Unless I'm wrong it seems like either works just fine - is there a best practice reason to prefer one over the other?
Example:
struct A
{
A(){}
A(const A&){ std::cout << "A(const A&)\n"; }
A(A&&){ std::cout << "A(A&&)\n"; }
};
struct B
{
B(){}
B(const B& right) : x(right.x){ std::cout << "B(const B&)\n"; }
B(B&& right) : x(std::forward<A>(right.x)){ std::cout << "B(B&&)\n"; }
A x;
};
struct C
{
C(){}
C(const C& right) : x(right.x){ std::cout << "C(const C&)\n"; }
C(C&& right) : x(std::move(right.x)){ std::cout << "C(C&&)\n"; }
A x;
};
struct D
{
D(){}
D(const D& right) : x(right.x){ std::cout << "D(const D&)\n"; }
D(D&& right) : x(right.x){ std::cout << "D(D&&)\n"; }
A x;
};
int main()
{
std::cout << "--- B Test ---\n";
B b1;
B b2(std::move(b1));
std::cout << "--- C Test ---\n";
C c1;
C c2(std::move(c1));
std::cout << "--- D Test ---\n";
D d1;
D d2(std::move(d1));
}
Output:
--- B Test ---
A(A&&)
B(B&&)
--- C Test ---
A(A&&)
C(C&&)
--- D Test ---
A(const A&)
D(D&&)
The question is: Are those really the move constructor / assignment operator for the class? Or do they only look like that from the corner of your eye?
struct X{
X(X&&); // move ctor #1
template<class T>
X(T&&); // perfect forwarding ctor #2
X& operator=(X&&); // move assignment operator #3
template<class T>
X& operator=(T&&); // perfect forwarding ass. operator #4
};
In a real move ctor (#1) and move assignment operator (#3), you will never use std::forward
, since, as you correctly assessed, you will always move.
Note that std::forward
never makes sense without a perfect forwarding template (T&&
). That is exactly the case for #2 and #4. Here, you will never use std::move
, since you don't know if you actually got an rvalue (A-OK) or an lvalue (not so much).
See this answer of mine for an explanation of how std::forward
actually works.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With