Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 7531781
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 30, 20262026-05-30T05:15:55+00:00 2026-05-30T05:15:55+00:00

At this point, writing the copy constructor and assignment operator pair is well-defined; a

  • 0

At this point, writing the copy constructor and assignment operator pair is well-defined; a quick search will lead you to plenty of hits on how to properly code these.

Now that the move constructor has entered the mix, is there a new “best” way?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-30T05:15:57+00:00Added an answer on May 30, 2026 at 5:15 am

    Preferably, they’ll just be = default;, since the member types should be of resource managing types that hide the move details from you, like std::unique_ptr. Only the implementors of those “low level” types should bother with dealing with that.

    Remember that you only need to bother with move semantics if you’re holding an external (to your object) resource. It’s completely useless for “flat” types.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I am having problem in writing copy constructor for pointers to objects. This is
Before I embark on writing my own solution to this issue, can anyone point
In writing a copy constructor for a class that holds a pointer to dynamically
I am writing a function like this. func :: IO() func = putStr print
Up to this point we have not yet needed a new masterpage for our
I'm convinced at this point that I should be creating subclasses of std::exception for
I've edited this quite a bit and bolded my question at this point. I
Having programmed through emacs and vi for years and years at this point, I
I want to build a 2 dimensional (non ragged at this point) object array.
I am faced with the following issue and at this point I feel like

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.