This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of Resolved status.

### 1356. The definition of move-constructor is redundant

Section: 99 [defns.move.ctor] Status: Resolved Submitter: BSI Opened: 2010-08-25 Last modified: 2016-01-28

Priority: Not Prioritized

View all issues with Resolved status.

Discussion:

Addresses GB-51

This definition of move-constructor is redundant and confusing now that the term constructor is defined by the core language in subclause 12.8p3.

[ 2010-10-24 Daniel adds: ]

> Accepting n3142 provides a superior resolution.

[ 2010 Batavia: resolved as NAD Editorial by adopting paper n3142. ]

Original proposed resolution preserved for reference:

> Strike subclause 17.3.14, [defns.move.ctor]

> > 17.3.14 [defns.move.ctor]
> > move constructor a constructor which accepts only an rvalue argument of the type being constructed and might modify the argument as a side effect during construction.

Proposed resolution:

Resolved by paper n3142.