Consider the following code:
#include <iostream>
#define P_(x) std::cout << x << std::endl
class B {
public:
B() { P_("B::B()"); }
B(const B&) { P_("B::B(const B&)"); }
B(B&&) { P_("B::B(B&&)"); }
~B() { P_("B::~B()"); }
B& operator=(const B&) { P_("B::op=(const B&)"); return *this; }
B& operator=(B&& b) { P_("B::op=(B&&)"); return *this; }
};
class Foo {
public:
void setB(const B& b) { mB = b; }
private:
B mB;
};
B genB() {
return B();
}
int main() {
Foo f;
f.setB(genB());
}
Suppose B
is a type that is difficult to copy-construct. I'd like to generate some B
(with the function genB
) and store it in a Foo
. Since genB
returns a temporary result, I'd expect that a move constructor would be used.
However, when I run the code, I get this output:
B::B()
B::B()
B::op=(const B&)
B::~B()
B::~B()
This clearly shows that two B's get created and destroyed, but that the second is a copy, and not a move of the first.
What is the best way to get move constructors used whenever possible?
- Do I need to call std::move() somewhere?
- Do I need a separate overload for a
B&
and aB&&
? - Is there something else entirely that I'm missing?