Re: Automatially move from $n (was: C++11 move semantics)

[Hans Åberg]

> On 1 Apr 2018, at 22:32, Frank Heckenbach <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> Hans Åberg wrote:
> 
>>> If semantic_type doesn't have a "*" operator of its own, this might
>>> work (but look confusing). However, I use the variant (so I'd need
>>> this function for each alternative, which might be possible to do
>>> with templates), but some of my semantic values are (smart)
>>> pointers, so "*" is already used (and even if I could somehow
>>> override it, it would suggest dereferencing rather than moving).
>> 
>> Alternative unary operators are listed as point 3 at [1]. One can
>> overload operator&, but is more confusing than *, as it disables
>> taking the address-of.
> 
> Yeah; all existing operators have their meaning, and might apply to
> some or all alternatives one might use. C++ doesn't allow defining
> new operators (probably for good reasons), and I'm generally wary of
> overloading operators for unrelated purposes (don't already like the
> stream "<<" and ">>" too much).
> 
>>> Now, if C++ had a dedicated move operator (which would also be
>>> useful in other code) ... But (ab)using an existing operator seems
>>> confusing to me.
>> 
>> Or a shorter name.
> 
> Well, with "using std::move" it's a bit shorter (just "move ($n)"),
> but still too much clutter for my taste.

An advantage with operators names is avoiding parentheses, but a problem is 
that they are hard to search for, but here, since they will always together 
with the $k, that should not be a problem. Candidate names might be operator * 
& ~ + -.