5fa6c5a941
Summary: changelog: [internal] You can read more about this rule on https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/modernize-pass-by-value.html # Isn't it wasteful to copy? Isn't reference more efficient? This rule of thumb is no longer true since C++11 with move semantics. Let's look at some examples. # Option one ``` class TextHolder { public: TextBox(std::string const &text) : text_(text) {} private: std::string text_; }; ``` By using reference here, we prevent the caller from using rvalue to and avoiding copy. Regardless of what the caller passes in, copy always happens. # Option two ``` class TextHolder { public: TextBox(std::string const &text) : text_(text) {} TextBox(std::string &&text) : text_(std::move(text)) {} private: std::string text_; }; ``` Here, we provide two constructors, one for const reference and one for rvalue reference. This gives the caller option to avoid copy. But now we have two constructors, which is not ideal. # Option three (what we do in this diff) ``` class TextHolder { public: TextBox(std::string text) : text_(std::move(text)) {} private: std::string text_; }; ``` Here, the caller has option to avoid copy and we only have single constructor. Reviewed By: fkgozali, JoshuaGross Differential Revision: D33276841 fbshipit-source-id: 619d5123d2e28937b22874650366629f24f20a63 |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| config | ||
| debug | ||
| nativemodule | ||
| renderer | ||
| test_utils | ||
| utils | ||