#ot
Thespartann
BinaryByter
klimi
BinaryByter
this is probably C
BinaryByter
duh
14•08
Francisco
Not exactly
BinaryByter
add a minmax algo to make the engine play tictactoe against the user
BinaryByter
trust me, you'll learn a lot
Azons
Yes i know that 😎👍
Anonymous
add a minmax algo to make the engine play tictactoe against the user
Umm that’s a good idea
Silvestr
Have one question) about move semantic and rvalue.
string&& func()...
vs
string func()
inside func(){ return string("hfhfhf");} this two return types with && and without have different effect?
BinaryByter
the string you move from gets destroyed
BinaryByter
well unusable
Silvestr
Question is about when I assign this function to variable std::string s = func() it will be assigned as rvalue?
Anonymous
Yeah but I guess i've seen somewhere but i don't remember
You have X Amount of turns to guess a word before the man get hung to death , funny it’s a children’s game
klimi
:D
14•08
Anonymous
Just practicing the little c++ I know
klimi
Looks like bot
14•08
It was invented long before I was born
Hahaha I thought you're the one from them who developed it
MᏫᎻᎯᎷᎷᎬᎠ
.
14•08
MᏫᎻᎯᎷᎷᎬᎠ
:()
MᏫᎻᎯᎷᎷᎬᎠ
:\/
14•08
Someone help me 😔
olli
Have one question) about move semantic and rvalue.
string&& func()...
vs
string func()
inside func(){ return string("hfhfhf");} this two return types with && and without have different effect?
yes, it's different. Your compiler should warn about one of these options. A r-value reference is still a reference
Silvestr
Silvestr
And what is means?
Silvestr
That I can't return it from function
MᏫᎻᎯᎷᎷᎬᎠ
I think I forgot C++
14•08
Can anyone show me how to accept user inputs in the structure.c
MᏫᎻᎯᎷᎷᎬᎠ
I didn't write a thing for 1 week
olli
Yeah
so you should know that returning references to local objects results in a dangling reference.
Silvestr
It's address on memory that can't be a null
Silvestr
olli
Sure
this applies to r-value references as well, hence you should avoid returning r-value references to locals
14•08
Oh any tutorial wanna see ..
MᏫᎻᎯᎷᎷᎬᎠ
this applies to r-value references as well, hence you should avoid returning r-value references to locals
Rvalue reference is destroyed once it's returned
MᏫᎻᎯᎷᎷᎬᎠ
I think you meant lvalue reference
Silvestr
this applies to r-value references as well, hence you should avoid returning r-value references to locals
The last question.
std::string&& s = func()
here for s was called move constructor?
14•08
MᏫᎻᎯᎷᎷᎬᎠ
olli
@BOND_0O7
no, I meant rvalue references. A rvalue reference does not increase the lifetime of an object.
Why should you not write std::string& avoid() { return std::string("hello"); } ?
For the same reasong you should not write std::string&& avoid2() { return std::string("hello"); } either
olli
The last question.
std::string&& s = func()
here for s was called move constructor?
no. You're only holding a reference not creating a new object
MᏫᎻᎯᎷᎷᎬᎠ
@BOND_0O7
no, I meant rvalue references. A rvalue reference does not increase the lifetime of an object.
Why should you not write std::string& avoid() { return std::string("hello"); } ?
For the same reasong you should not write std::string&& avoid2() { return std::string("hello"); } either
How about return std::move(string ("hello")); in the second one?
olli
How about return std::move(string ("hello")); in the second one?
doesn't make any difference. std::move is basically just a cast, you're still returning the reference to a local object. hence Danling reference
Silvestr
no. You're only holding a reference not creating a new object
What is called for s object when I assign function result for it?
Silvestr
I mean what operator or constructor