I maybe asking a dumb question, but I looked开发者_如何学Go at the wikipedia page for RVO here and could not stop wondering if that behavior is wrong. I tried it in my machine and RVO is fully kicked
Short version: It\'s common to return large objects—such as vectors/arrays—in many programming languages. Is this style now acceptable in C++0x if the class has a move constructor, or do C++ program
I\'ve go a very simple question, but unfortunately I can\'t figure the answer myself. Suppose I\'ve got some data structure that holds settings and acts like a settings map.
Please consider the following code, struct foo { foo() { std::cout << \"Constructing!\" << std::endl;
Reading this Wikipedia article pointed by one of the repliers to the following question: C++ Copy constructor, temporaries and copy semantics
How do you go about using the return value optimization? Is there any cases where I can trust a modern compiler to use the optimization, or should I always go the safe way and return a pointer of som
From the following code, If RVO has happened, I expect to see the 2 addresses pointing to the same location, however this is not the case (my compiler i开发者_StackOverflow社区s MS VC9.0)
加载中,请稍侯......