Comments on: RValue reference and move semantic for the poor I usually do the same. There is no other way ensuring the __retrict contract is respected.And if it is not, the result is unpredictable. So, yes, asserting on this is really a good idea. I usually do the same. There is no other way ensuring the __retrict contract is respected.And if it is not, the result is unpredictable. So, yes, asserting on this is really a good idea.

]]>
By: Garett Bass/2011/02/02/rvalue-reference-and-move-semantic-for-the-poor/#comment-1051 Garett Bass Sat, 26 Feb 2011 06:10:15 +0000 I'm tempted to assert(first != second) in a __restrict'ed function. Assuming my asserts are only in debug builds, is there any obscure reason why this would be a bad idea? I’m tempted to assert(first != second) in a __restrict’ed function. Assuming my asserts are only in debug builds, is there any obscure reason why this would be a bad idea?

]]>
By: Lars Viklund/2011/02/02/rvalue-reference-and-move-semantic-for-the-poor/#comment-446 Lars Viklund Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:17:29 +0000