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 5936005
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 22, 20262026-05-22T15:20:12+00:00 2026-05-22T15:20:12+00:00

I’ve been studying rvalue references lately and came to a conclusion that it’s quite

  • 0

I’ve been studying rvalue references lately and came to a conclusion that it’s quite advantageous to use pass-by-value everywhere where complete copy of an object will be made (for complete justification see e.g. How to reduce redundant code when adding rvalue reference operator overloads? and Want speed? Pass by value!), because the compiler can automatically optimize a copy away in cases such as f(std::move(a));, where f is defined as void f(A a);.

One negative consequence of pass-by-value-everywhere is that all the code becomes littered with std::move even in simple cases such as:

void Object::value(A a) 
{
    value_ = std::move(a);
}

Obviously, if I wrote only the following:

void Object::value(A a) 
{
    value_ = a;
}

it shouldn’t be hard for the compiler to recognize that a is near the end of its lifetime even without the hint and not to penalize me with additional copy. In fact, the compiler should be able to recognize this even in complex functions.

The questions:

  1. Is this optimization allowed by the C++0x Standard?

  2. Do the compilers employ it? Even in complex cases, i.e. the function consists from more than one line?

  3. How reliable is this optimization, i.e. can I expect the compiler to utilize it as much as I expect the compiler to apply Return Value Optimization?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 5 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
    2026-05-22T15:20:13+00:00Added an answer on May 22, 2026 at 3:20 pm

    Is this optimization allowed by the C++0x Standard?

    No.

    Do the compilers employ it? Even in
    complex cases, i.e. the function
    consists from more than one line?

    No.

    How reliable is this optimization,
    i.e. can I expect the compiler to
    utilize it as much as I expect the
    compiler to apply Return Value
    Optimization?

    You should decorate A(const A&) and A(A&&) with print statements and run test cases of interest to you. Don’t forget to test lvalue arguments if those use cases are part of your design.

    The correct answers will depend upon how expensive the copy and move of A are,how many arguments Object::value actually has, and how much code repetition you’re willing to put up with.

    Finally, be very suspicious of any guideline that contains words like “always” or “everywhere”. E.g. I use goto every once in a while. But other programmers have words like “never” associated with goto. But every once in a while, you can’t beat a goto for both speed and clarity.

    There will be times you should favor a pair of foo(const A&) foo(A&&) over foo(A). And times you won’t. Your experiments with decorated copy and move members will guide you.

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

Sidebar

Related Questions

I'm parsing an RSS feed that has an ’ in it. SimpleXML turns this
I have a jquery bug and I've been looking for hours now, I can't
I have a string like this: La Torre Eiffel paragonata all’Everest What PHP function
link Im having trouble converting the html entites into html characters, (&# 8217;) i
That's pretty much it. I'm using Nokogiri to scrape a web page what has
I am trying to understand how to use SyndicationItem to display feed which is
I've got a string that has curly quotes in it. I'd like to replace
I have a small JavaScript validation script that validates inputs based on Regex. I
I am doing a simple coin flipping experiment for class that involves flipping a
I have a French site that I want to parse, but am running into

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.