DIP 1014

[Manu]

On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 6:15 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/2/2018 4:30 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 2 October 2018 at 22:30:38 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> >> Yeah. IIRC, it was supposed to be _guaranteed_ that the compiler moved structs
> >> in a number of situations - e.g. when the return value was an rvalue.
> >> Something like
> >
> > Eh, I don't think that moves it, but rather just constructs it in-place for the
> > next call.
>
> The technical term for that is "copy elision".

Okay, so copy elision is working... but moves otherwise are not?
That's still not what we've been peddling all these years. A whole lot
of design surface area is dedicated to implicit move semantics... and
they don't work? What does it do? postblit unnecessarily?