[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D69080: eliminate one form of PythonObject::Reset()

[Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits]

labath added inline comments.


================
Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/ScriptInterpreter/Python/PythonDataObjects.h:235-245
   PythonObject &operator=(const PythonObject &other) {
     Reset(PyRefType::Borrowed, other.get());
     return *this;
   }
 
-  void Reset(PythonObject &&other) {
+  PythonObject &operator=(PythonObject &&other) {
     Reset();
----------------
lawrence_danna wrote:
> labath wrote:
> > You can consider simplifying this further down to a "universal"/"sink" `operator=(PythonObject other)`. Since the object is really just a pointer, the extra object being created won't hurt (in fact, the removal of `&`-indirection might make things faster).
> wouldn't that result in an extra retain and release every time a PythonObject was copied instead of referenced or moved?
No, it shouldn't, because the temporary PythonObject will be move-constructed (== no refcount traffic), if the operator= is called with an xvalue (if the rhs was not an xvalue, then you wouldn't end up calling the `&&` overload anyway). Then you can move the temporary object into *this, and avoid refcount traffic again.

So, there is an additional PythonObject created, but it's move-constructed if possible, which should be efficient, if I understand these classes correctly. This is the recommended practice (at least by some) when you don't want to squeeze every last nanosecond of performance..


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69080/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69080