Why is std::move not [[nodiscard]] in C++20?

C++C++17Language LawyerC++20Nodiscard

C++ Problem Overview

I've recently read about [[nodiscard]] in C++17, and as far as I understand it's a new feature (design by contract?) which forces you to use the return value. This makes sense for controversial functions like std::launder (nodiscard since C++20), but I wonder why std::move isn't defined like so in C++17/20. Do you know a good reason or is it because C++20 isn't finalised yet?

C++ Solutions

Solution 1 - C++

The MSVC standard library team went ahead and added several thousand instances of [[nodiscard]] since VS 2017 15.6, and have reported wild success with it (both in terms of finding lots of bugs and generating no user complaints). The criteria they described were approximately:

  1. Pure observers, e.g. vector::size(), vector::empty, and even std::count_if()
  2. Things that acquire raw resources, e.g. allocate()
  3. Functions where discarding the return value is extremely likely to lead to incorrect code, e.g. std::remove()

MSVC does mark both std::move() and std::forward() as [[nodiscard]] following these criteria.

While it's not officially annotated as such in the standard, it seems to provide clear user benefit and it's more a question of crafting such a paper to mark all the right things [[nodiscard]] (again, several thousand instances from MSVC) and apply them -- it's not complex work per se, but the volume is large. In the meantime, maybe prod your favorite standard library vendor and ask them to [[nodiscard]] lots of stuff?

Solution 2 - C++

AFAIK P0600R1 is the only proposal for adding [[nodiscard]] to the standard library that was applied to C++20. From that paper:

> We suggest a conservative approach: > > [...] > > It should not be added when: > > - [...] > - not using the return value makes no sense but doesn’t hurt and is usually not an error > - [...] > > So, [[nodiscard]] should not signal bad code if this > > - [...] > - doesn’t hurt and probably no state change was meant that doesn’t happen

So the reason is that the standard library uses a conservative approach and a more aggresive one is not yet proposed.

Categories
Recommended C++ Solutions
Recommended C++17 Solutions
Recommended Language Lawyer Solutions
Recommended C++20 Solutions

Previous Solution:

React useEffect Hook when only one of the effect's deps changes, but not the others

JavascriptReactjsReact Hooks

Next Solution:

Django ImportError: cannot import name 'render_to_response' from 'django.shortcuts'

PythonDjangoPython 3.xDjango ViewsDjango 3.0

Attributions

All content for this solution is sourced from the original question on Stackoverflow.

The content on this page is licensed under the Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license.

Content TypeOriginal AuthorOriginal Content on Stackoverflow
QuestionbbalchevView Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - C++BarryView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - C++cpplearnerView Answer on Stackoverflow