Add move semantics (constructor, operator=) to List.
#100563
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
hpvb
approved these changes
Dec 18, 2024
ze2j
reviewed
Dec 19, 2024
Ivorforce
force-pushed
the
move-semantics-list
branch
from
f45ba11 to
19992e3
Compare
clayjohn
approved these changes
Dec 19, 2024
|
Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We've recently begun to introduce move semantics to core, for its performance benefits. Examples of functions that can benefit a lot from move semantics include SWAP (#100367), reduce_at and insert (#100477), and simple data transfer. For more information on motivation, see #100426.
For
List, this is especially important because a copy-constructor and copy-assignment are forced to copy the entire array, and all elements in it. And worse, becauseListis not contiguous, this is slow.I first wanted to do a use-case analysis like in #100560, but quickly gave up because there were just too many beneficiaries of
Listmove semantics.