DConf 2013 Day 1 Talk 2 (Copy and Move Semantics)

[deadalnix]

On Sunday, 12 May 2013 at 09:10:56 UTC, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
> On 2013-05-12, 08:12, deadalnix wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, 11 May 2013 at 22:24:38 UTC, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
>>> I'm not convinced. unique, like const or immutable, is 
>>> transitive. If foo
>>> is unique, then so is foo.bar.
>>>
>>
>> That isn't true. Please read microsoft's paper.
>
> Done. *Mostly* transitive, then. Anything reachable through a 
> unique
> reference is either unique or immutable.

No.

Think about it : when you reach something via a uniq pointer, it 
is by definition not unique as you have 2 copies of it, because 
you just accessed it.

Plus the unique pointer refers to a unique mutable graph of 
object. A object into that graph can have several object into the 
graph refereing to it.

You are wrong in 2 different ways.