[libcxx-commits] [PATCH] D99873: [libcxx] adds `std::ranges::iter_move` and `std::iter_rvalue_reference_t`

[Christopher Di Bella via Phabricator via libcxx-commits]

cjdb updated this revision to Diff 337979.
cjdb marked 3 inline comments as done.
cjdb retitled this revision from "[libcxx] adds `std::ranges::iter_move` and `std::iter_rvalue_reference_t" to "[libcxx] adds `std::ranges::iter_move` and `std::iter_rvalue_reference_t`".
cjdb added a comment.

@miscco's suggestion has been gnawing at me for a little while, so I checked it out with someone extremely knowledgeable about both core C++ and Clang. They encouraged benchmarking to be sure, but said they expect `if constexpr` to be faster than an overload set. They also said it isn't unlikely that the speed boost would be significant, and that there's a good chance the memory usage would be lower too.

With all that in mind, I think the added complexity is justified.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D99873/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D99873

Files:
  libcxx/include/concepts
  libcxx/include/iterator
  libcxx/test/std/iterators/iterator.requirements/iterator.cust/iterator.cust.move/iter_move.pass.cpp
  libcxx/test/std/iterators/iterator.requirements/iterator.cust/iterator.cust.move/iter_rvalue_reference_t.pass.cpp
  libcxx/test/std/iterators/iterator.requirements/iterator.cust/unqualified_lookup_wrapper.h

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: D99873.337979.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 16534 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/libcxx-commits/attachments/20210416/ecc8965a/attachment.bin>