c++17 - Curious about this detail, rvalue vs const ref - Stack Overflow

In this simple example r-value ref is preferred.int f(const std::string& str){return 1;}int f(st

In this simple example r-value ref is preferred.

int f(const std::string& str)
{
    return 1;
}

int f(std::string&& str)
{
    return 2;
}

int main()
{
    std::cout << f("Hello!") << std::endl;
}

My c++11 gut tells me I'd go for the const ref version.

Is there a compelling reason why the r-value ref version is preferred?

I thought we liked the constness of the first version.

发布者:admin,转转请注明出处:http://www.yc00.com/questions/1745071259a4609560.html

相关推荐

  • c++17 - Curious about this detail, rvalue vs const ref - Stack Overflow

    In this simple example r-value ref is preferred.int f(const std::string& str){return 1;}int f(st

    23小时前
    20

发表回复

评论列表(0条)

  • 暂无评论

联系我们

400-800-8888

在线咨询: QQ交谈

邮件:admin@example.com

工作时间:周一至周五,9:30-18:30,节假日休息

关注微信