Aggressively implement rule of 5 #1621
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a follow-up to #1620 where we found that missing move constructors where potentially leaving measurable performance gains on the table. In this patch I aggressively implement rule of 5. While #1620 was a clear win the results for that patches in this PR are less conclusive, and I might even see counterintuitive degraded performance by e.g., 0af5252 (using a huge internal grammar, but also using gcc-9.4.0 and with a lot of noise).
For the time being I am putting this up for reference, but will come back later with possible improvements or new data.