Prefix MOVE_ONLY_TYPE_FOR_CPP_03 with WEBRTC_.
Will fix a redefinition error in Chromium against webrtc head.
TESTED=trybots
R=pbos@webrtc.org
Review URL: https://webrtc-codereview.appspot.com/2869004
git-svn-id: http://webrtc.googlecode.com/svn/trunk@5029 4adac7df-926f-26a2-2b94-8c16560cd09d
diff --git a/webrtc/system_wrappers/interface/move.h b/webrtc/system_wrappers/interface/move.h
deleted file mode 100644
index d828c32..0000000
--- a/webrtc/system_wrappers/interface/move.h
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,215 +0,0 @@
-/*
- * Copyright (c) 2013 The WebRTC project authors. All Rights Reserved.
- *
- * Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license
- * that can be found in the LICENSE file in the root of the source
- * tree. An additional intellectual property rights grant can be found
- * in the file PATENTS. All contributing project authors may
- * be found in the AUTHORS file in the root of the source tree.
- */
-
-// Borrowed from Chromium's src/base/move.h.
-
-#ifndef WEBRTC_SYSTEM_WRAPPERS_INTEFACE_MOVE_H_
-#define WEBRTC_SYSTEM_WRAPPERS_INTEFACE_MOVE_H_
-
-// Macro with the boilerplate that makes a type move-only in C++03.
-//
-// USAGE
-//
-// This macro should be used instead of DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN to create
-// a "move-only" type. Unlike DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN, this macro should be
-// the first line in a class declaration.
-//
-// A class using this macro must call .Pass() (or somehow be an r-value already)
-// before it can be:
-//
-// * Passed as a function argument
-// * Used as the right-hand side of an assignment
-// * Returned from a function
-//
-// Each class will still need to define their own "move constructor" and "move
-// operator=" to make this useful. Here's an example of the macro, the move
-// constructor, and the move operator= from the scoped_ptr class:
-//
-// template <typename T>
-// class scoped_ptr {
-// MOVE_ONLY_TYPE_FOR_CPP_03(scoped_ptr, RValue)
-// public:
-// scoped_ptr(RValue& other) : ptr_(other.release()) { }
-// scoped_ptr& operator=(RValue& other) {
-// swap(other);
-// return *this;
-// }
-// };
-//
-// Note that the constructor must NOT be marked explicit.
-//
-// For consistency, the second parameter to the macro should always be RValue
-// unless you have a strong reason to do otherwise. It is only exposed as a
-// macro parameter so that the move constructor and move operator= don't look
-// like they're using a phantom type.
-//
-//
-// HOW THIS WORKS
-//
-// For a thorough explanation of this technique, see:
-//
-// http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/More_C%2B%2B_Idioms/Move_Constructor
-//
-// The summary is that we take advantage of 2 properties:
-//
-// 1) non-const references will not bind to r-values.
-// 2) C++ can apply one user-defined conversion when initializing a
-// variable.
-//
-// The first lets us disable the copy constructor and assignment operator
-// by declaring private version of them with a non-const reference parameter.
-//
-// For l-values, direct initialization still fails like in
-// DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN because the copy constructor and assignment
-// operators are private.
-//
-// For r-values, the situation is different. The copy constructor and
-// assignment operator are not viable due to (1), so we are trying to call
-// a non-existent constructor and non-existing operator= rather than a private
-// one. Since we have not committed an error quite yet, we can provide an
-// alternate conversion sequence and a constructor. We add
-//
-// * a private struct named "RValue"
-// * a user-defined conversion "operator RValue()"
-// * a "move constructor" and "move operator=" that take the RValue& as
-// their sole parameter.
-//
-// Only r-values will trigger this sequence and execute our "move constructor"
-// or "move operator=." L-values will match the private copy constructor and
-// operator= first giving a "private in this context" error. This combination
-// gives us a move-only type.
-//
-// For signaling a destructive transfer of data from an l-value, we provide a
-// method named Pass() which creates an r-value for the current instance
-// triggering the move constructor or move operator=.
-//
-// Other ways to get r-values is to use the result of an expression like a
-// function call.
-//
-// Here's an example with comments explaining what gets triggered where:
-//
-// class Foo {
-// MOVE_ONLY_TYPE_FOR_CPP_03(Foo, RValue);
-//
-// public:
-// ... API ...
-// Foo(RValue other); // Move constructor.
-// Foo& operator=(RValue rhs); // Move operator=
-// };
-//
-// Foo MakeFoo(); // Function that returns a Foo.
-//
-// Foo f;
-// Foo f_copy(f); // ERROR: Foo(Foo&) is private in this context.
-// Foo f_assign;
-// f_assign = f; // ERROR: operator=(Foo&) is private in this context.
-//
-//
-// Foo f(MakeFoo()); // R-value so alternate conversion executed.
-// Foo f_copy(f.Pass()); // R-value so alternate conversion executed.
-// f = f_copy.Pass(); // R-value so alternate conversion executed.
-//
-//
-// IMPLEMENTATION SUBTLETIES WITH RValue
-//
-// The RValue struct is just a container for a pointer back to the original
-// object. It should only ever be created as a temporary, and no external
-// class should ever declare it or use it in a parameter.
-//
-// It is tempting to want to use the RValue type in function parameters, but
-// excluding the limited usage here for the move constructor and move
-// operator=, doing so would mean that the function could take both r-values
-// and l-values equially which is unexpected. See COMPARED To Boost.Move for
-// more details.
-//
-// An alternate, and incorrect, implementation of the RValue class used by
-// Boost.Move makes RValue a fieldless child of the move-only type. RValue&
-// is then used in place of RValue in the various operators. The RValue& is
-// "created" by doing *reinterpret_cast<RValue*>(this). This has the appeal
-// of never creating a temporary RValue struct even with optimizations
-// disabled. Also, by virtue of inheritance you can treat the RValue
-// reference as if it were the move-only type itself. Unfortunately,
-// using the result of this reinterpret_cast<> is actually undefined behavior
-// due to C++98 5.2.10.7. In certain compilers (e.g., NaCl) the optimizer
-// will generate non-working code.
-//
-// In optimized builds, both implementations generate the same assembly so we
-// choose the one that adheres to the standard.
-//
-//
-// COMPARED TO C++11
-//
-// In C++11, you would implement this functionality using an r-value reference
-// and our .Pass() method would be replaced with a call to std::move().
-//
-// This emulation also has a deficiency where it uses up the single
-// user-defined conversion allowed by C++ during initialization. This can
-// cause problems in some API edge cases. For instance, in scoped_ptr, it is
-// impossible to make a function "void Foo(scoped_ptr<Parent> p)" accept a
-// value of type scoped_ptr<Child> even if you add a constructor to
-// scoped_ptr<> that would make it look like it should work. C++11 does not
-// have this deficiency.
-//
-//
-// COMPARED TO Boost.Move
-//
-// Our implementation similar to Boost.Move, but we keep the RValue struct
-// private to the move-only type, and we don't use the reinterpret_cast<> hack.
-//
-// In Boost.Move, RValue is the boost::rv<> template. This type can be used
-// when writing APIs like:
-//
-// void MyFunc(boost::rv<Foo>& f)
-//
-// that can take advantage of rv<> to avoid extra copies of a type. However you
-// would still be able to call this version of MyFunc with an l-value:
-//
-// Foo f;
-// MyFunc(f); // Uh oh, we probably just destroyed |f| w/o calling Pass().
-//
-// unless someone is very careful to also declare a parallel override like:
-//
-// void MyFunc(const Foo& f)
-//
-// that would catch the l-values first. This was declared unsafe in C++11 and
-// a C++11 compiler will explicitly fail MyFunc(f). Unfortunately, we cannot
-// ensure this in C++03.
-//
-// Since we have no need for writing such APIs yet, our implementation keeps
-// RValue private and uses a .Pass() method to do the conversion instead of
-// trying to write a version of "std::move()." Writing an API like std::move()
-// would require the RValue struct to be public.
-//
-//
-// CAVEATS
-//
-// If you include a move-only type as a field inside a class that does not
-// explicitly declare a copy constructor, the containing class's implicit
-// copy constructor will change from Containing(const Containing&) to
-// Containing(Containing&). This can cause some unexpected errors.
-//
-// http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=11528
-//
-// The workaround is to explicitly declare your copy constructor.
-//
-#define MOVE_ONLY_TYPE_FOR_CPP_03(type, rvalue_type) \
- private: \
- struct rvalue_type { \
- explicit rvalue_type(type* object) : object(object) {} \
- type* object; \
- }; \
- type(type&); \
- void operator=(type&); \
- public: \
- operator rvalue_type() { return rvalue_type(this); } \
- type Pass() { return type(rvalue_type(this)); } \
- private:
-
-#endif // WEBRTC_SYSTEM_WRAPPERS_INTEFACE_MOVE_H_
diff --git a/webrtc/system_wrappers/interface/scoped_ptr.h b/webrtc/system_wrappers/interface/scoped_ptr.h
index a2a1b44..cd9daf2 100644
--- a/webrtc/system_wrappers/interface/scoped_ptr.h
+++ b/webrtc/system_wrappers/interface/scoped_ptr.h
@@ -106,8 +106,8 @@
#include "webrtc/system_wrappers/interface/compile_assert.h"
#include "webrtc/system_wrappers/interface/constructor_magic.h"
-#include "webrtc/system_wrappers/interface/move.h"
#include "webrtc/system_wrappers/interface/template_util.h"
+#include "webrtc/system_wrappers/source/move.h"
#include "webrtc/typedefs.h"
namespace webrtc {
@@ -302,7 +302,7 @@
// types.
template <class T, class D = webrtc::DefaultDeleter<T> >
class scoped_ptr {
- MOVE_ONLY_TYPE_FOR_CPP_03(scoped_ptr, RValue)
+ WEBRTC_MOVE_ONLY_TYPE_FOR_CPP_03(scoped_ptr, RValue)
public:
// The element and deleter types.
@@ -436,7 +436,7 @@
template <class T, class D>
class scoped_ptr<T[], D> {
- MOVE_ONLY_TYPE_FOR_CPP_03(scoped_ptr, RValue)
+ WEBRTC_MOVE_ONLY_TYPE_FOR_CPP_03(scoped_ptr, RValue)
public:
// The element and deleter types.