Comment by bitbasher

Comment by bitbasher 8 hours ago

I never understood move semantics until I learned Rust. Everything is move by default and the compiler makes sure you never leave things in an unusable state.

This was a difficult mental hurdle to get over with Rust, but once you do, move semantics make a lot more sense.

edit: When I said everything is move by default, I mean everything that isn't "Copy", such as integers, floats, etc.

Conscat 8 hours ago

What Rust loses with that decision is the ability to program the "semantics" in move semantics. Rust has no distinction between hypothetical place constructor and value constructor.

Reply View 2 replies

lowq 2 hours ago

I sure don't miss the footguns and raw boilerplate that is having a copy constructor, move constructor, copy assignment operator, move assignment operator, and destructor, per class.
Yes, you should avoid the manual memory management that necessitates writing them. But work with a team of developers fresh out of school and next thing you know your codebase will be brimming with this kind of busywork.

Reply View | 0 replies
anematode 7 hours ago

A loss of functionality, but arguably a good thing, e.g. moving will never throw an exception/panic so you don't need an equivalent to is_nothrow_move_constructible

Reply View | 0 replies