http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51981
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse <marc.glisse at normalesup dot org> 2012-01-25 15:02:55 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > It looks like it would be equivalent to uninitialized_copy with > > make_move_iterator, not so useful then. > > This makes sense, but not so obvious for novices in C++11. I don't think novices should use anything with "uninitialized" in the name. Notice that very few functions on iterators have a move version. vector::insert doesn't come with a move_insert counterpart. > If continuing in this vein, then std::move() can be substituted by std::copy() > with input iterator wrapped into make_move_iterator(). True, although there can be subtle differences for input iterators where the reference type is not a reference to the value_type (there's a DR about that). > Then std::move() is not so useful :) Indeed. The standard tries to keep a balance, and I guess move was considered common enough to deserve its own interface, but could easily have been removed. Note that I don't think gcc's bugzilla is the best place for such discussions...
