I wrote down some thoughts about how a "transient" qualifier may have been a much better way to achieve move semantics in C++ compared to the awfulness of rvalue references. http://ericlengyel.blogspot.com/2017/11/some-thoughts-about-rvalue-references.html …
-
-
It's likely we're not thinking in the same way. I don't see a problem with this since transience can never be implicitly added. Moving would continue to occur only after you're inside a context that has move semantics.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.