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 9127433
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 17, 20262026-06-17T07:16:53+00:00 2026-06-17T07:16:53+00:00

In this question discussed When to make a type non-movable in C++11 and I

  • 0

In this question discussed When to make a type non-movable in C++11 and I discovered Scott Meyers had similar question on comp.std.c++, where SG listed below class types are not movable in C++11 libeary.

  • all mutex types(recursive_mutex , timed_mutex, recursive_timed_mutex,
  • condition_variable
  • type_info
  • error_category
  • locale::facet
  • random_device
  • seed_seq
  • reference_wrapper
  • duration
  • time_point
  • – all iterators / iterator adaptors
  • ios_base
  • basic_istream::sentry
  • basic_ostream::sentry
  • all atomic types
  • once_flag

The question is why is all iterators / iterator adaptors not-movable ?

  • 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
    2026-06-17T07:16:54+00:00Added an answer on June 17, 2026 at 7:16 am

    That post, from a year before the standard was ratified, is outdated. The poster is Daniel Krügler, an active committee member, and it’s a bit of political lobbying:

    These aren’t moveable and probably some more by accident, because the
    rules for implicitly generated move operations became clarified just
    at the Pittsburgh meeting. A general library issue has been opened

    http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1331

    to cope for lack of move support in the library. Be sure that you
    contact you national body representative, because I’ve heart that this
    issue is not a sufficient replacement for a national body comment
    against the FCD.

    In other words, all those types being non-movable would be a showstopper bug for the standard, and he wants readers in the Usenet audience to demand that the problem be fixed before the standard becomes official.

    The defect has been moved to the “closed” list. The resolution is (link provided for convenience):

    Review the library portion of the spec and incorporate the newly added core feature Move Special Member Functions (N3044).

    Since N3044 is a hefty bit of material, it’s easy to see why it would be essential for such basic functionality to work.

    Iterators, and anything else with simple value semantics like std::duration and std::time_point, are certainly movable. As others have mentioned, copyability implies movability, and if it didn’t the language would be broken. This post wasn’t wrong at the time; rather it’s arguing about the brokenness of the unfinished language.

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

Sidebar

Related Questions

I know this question has been discussed before, and I know this is such
I know this question might have already been discussed a thousands of times but
This is a question on C/C++ function definitions. The code discussed is the static
In this excellent SO question , differences between CTE and sub-queries were discussed. I
This question is similar in concept to this one , except I see I
This might be a very basic question and might have been discussed, but I
I realize that this question is pretty well discussed, however I would like to
The issue discussed in this question happened to me with a production site, but
As discussed in this question and everywhere else, Apple now requires apps to include
This question is similar to this one , but not a duplicate because I'm

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.