Namespaces
Variants
Views
Actions

C++ named requirements: MoveInsertable (since C++11)

From cppreference.com
< cpp‎ | named req
 
 
C++ named requirements
 

Specifies that an object of the type can be constructed into uninitialized storage from an rvalue of that type by a given allocator.

Contents

[edit] Requirements

Given the following types, values and expressions:

Type Definition
T an object type
A an allocator type
X a container type satisfying all following conditions:
  • X::value_type is the same as T.
  • X::allocator_type is the same as std::allocator_traits<A>::rebind_alloc<T>.
Value Definition
m an lvalue of type A
p a pointer of type T*
Expression Definition
rv an expression denoting an rvalue of type T
expr std::allocator_traits<A>::construct(m, p, rv)

T is MoveInsertable into X if all following conditions are satisfied:

  • expr is well-formed.
  • Right after the evaluation of expr, the value of *p is equivalent to the value of rv before the evaluation.

[edit] Notes

If A is std::allocator<T>, then this will call placement new, as by ::new((void*)p) T(rv)(until C++20)std::construct_at(p, rv)(since C++20). This effectively requires T to be move constructible.

If std::allocator<T> or a similar allocator is used, a class does not have to implement a move constructor to satisfy this type requirement: a copy constructor that takes a const T& argument can bind rvalue expressions. If a MoveInsertable class implements a move constructor, it may also implement move semantics to take advantage of the fact that the value of rv after construction is unspecified.

Although it is required that customized construct is used when constructing elements of std::basic_string until C++23, all implementations only used the default mechanism. The requirement is corrected by P1072R10 to match existing practice.

[edit] Defect reports

The following behavior-changing defect reports were applied retroactively to previously published C++ standards.

DR Applied to Behavior as published Correct behavior
LWG 2177 C++11 evaluting expr did not have any postcondition added

[edit] See also

CopyInsertable