Anything wrong with this function?

[Sylvester Hesp]

You must not build your answers without proving your opinion, to force me
to refute your statements without any hints. I am forced to guess what the
sources of your decision were.

There are many (in my opinion) valid points in my latest reply to you
(mostly regarding moving away from const variables using move semantics). If
you have anything left to say, focus on those points like I focused on
yours. If you want to discuss how to discuss, fine, but then I will leave
the thread as it is

- Sylvester

 

[Grizlyk]

There are many (in my opinion) valid points in my latest reply to you
(mostly regarding moving away from const variables using move semantics).

All of your points about "auto_ptr" has been discussed befor, it seems to me
with "Andre Kostur" in the topic "auto_ptr". No any new events has been
added by you here. You can see my objections there. Maybe it will be better
to group all about "auto_ptr" in one place.

If you want to discuss how to discuss, fine, but then I will leave the
thread as it is

As you wish. I will be free to note about useless forms of any discussions.

 

[Sylvester Hesp]

All of your points about "auto_ptr" has been discussed befor, it seems to
me with "Andre Kostur" in the topic "auto_ptr". No any new events has been
added by you here. You can see my objections there. Maybe it will be
better to group all about "auto_ptr" in one place.

You keep rambling on about auto_ptr while I've exited that train very long
(about 5 posts) ago. I was talking about the implications of moving away
from const variables. But, after reading the auto_ptr thread (which I
missed, thank you for bringing it to my attention), it seems you do not care
about const at all. You say you should use const as often as possible, yet
you design your classes that let you change their defined state while they
are const. That indeed makes this discussion pretty useless . Have a good
day, we'll probably meet again in further discussions

- Sylvester

 

[Grizlyk]

You keep rambling on about auto_ptr while I've exited that train very long
(about 5 posts) ago. I was talking about the implications of moving away
from const variables.

It (moving from const variables) is base of life of auto_ptr, so has been
discussed closely there.

But, after reading the auto_ptr thread (which I missed, thank you for
bringing it to my attention), it seems you do not care about const at all.

I do not know what are you speaking about, you can answer at the point you
have found it in auto_ptr thread.