> C++ “move” semantics are simple, but they are still widely misunderstood.
To use a quote from one of my favorite movies: you keep using that word. it doesn't mean what you think it means!
Articles such as this one remind of how C++ is such a design-by-committee language. Watching it evolve is like watching a 100 chefs in a kitchen working on a single dish, where everyone wants the dish to taste the way they like it.
This comment is probably not directly relevant to the article, but I had to get it off my chest.
I don't think design-by-committee is the problem, it's more the makeup of the committee. They're all mostly academics, compiler experts, c++ experts and trying to chase some sort of purity. The committee needs someone that represents the mere mortals.
To use a quote from one of my favorite movies: you keep using that word. it doesn't mean what you think it means!
Articles such as this one remind of how C++ is such a design-by-committee language. Watching it evolve is like watching a 100 chefs in a kitchen working on a single dish, where everyone wants the dish to taste the way they like it.
This comment is probably not directly relevant to the article, but I had to get it off my chest.