Reputation: 63
I am learning the move semantics in C++11. I wrote a small program to test the behavior of move semantics. But it does not behave as what I expected, could someone explain me why?
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
class Vector
{
public:
Vector()
{
cout << "empty Ctor"<<endl;
array = new int[10];
size = 10;
}
Vector(int n)
{
array = new int[n];
size = n;
for (int i=0; i<size; ++i)
array[i] = i;
cout << "Ctor"<<endl;
}
Vector(const Vector& v):size(v.size)
{
array = new int[size];
for (int i=0; i<size; ++i)
array[i] = v.array[i];
cout << "copy"<<endl;
}
Vector(Vector&& v):size(v.size)
{
array = v.array;
v.array = nullptr;
cout << "move"<<endl;
}
~Vector()
{
delete array;
}
private:
int* array;
int size;
};
int main() {
Vector v(10); //print Ctor. (as expected)
Vector v1(std::move(v)); //print move. (as expected)
Vector v2(*(new Vector(2))); //print Ctor, copy. (I expect Ctor, move)
Vector v3(Vector(2)); //print only Ctor. (I expect Ctor, move)
}
So, why the print is not what I expected. Since I think both value passed to v2 and v3 are Rvalue. And for v3, why it print only Ctor without printing "move" or "copy"
Upvotes: 4
Views: 112
Reputation: 65620
Vector v2(*(new Vector(2)));
new Vector(2)
is an rvalue, but dereferencing it produces an lvalue, hence the copy rather than the move.
Vector v3(Vector(2));
Since the temporary Vector
is unnecessary, the copy will be elided by the compiler. Your compiler may have a flag to disable copy elision so that you can see the additional move, e.g. -fno-elide-constructors
in GCC and Clang.
Upvotes: 11