From fea884184e7f9276dd2f87fc958daa6b0f70cd06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Titus Winters Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 11:48:04 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Blend new F.47 into existing text. --- CppCoreGuidelines.md | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/CppCoreGuidelines.md b/CppCoreGuidelines.md index a6f8b85..9a72d74 100644 --- a/CppCoreGuidelines.md +++ b/CppCoreGuidelines.md @@ -1820,6 +1820,7 @@ Value return semantic rules: * [F.44: Return a `T&` when "returning no object" isn't an option](#Rf-return-ref) * [F.45: Don't return a `T&&`](#Rf-return-ref-ref) * [F.46: `int` is the return type for `main()`](#Rf-main) +* [F.47: Return `T&` from assignment operators.](#Rf-assignment-op) Other function rules: @@ -2258,7 +2259,7 @@ For advanced uses (only), where you really need to optimize for rvalues passed t Avoid "esoteric techniques" such as: * Passing arguments as `T&&` "for efficiency". Most rumors about performance advantages from passing by `&&` are false or brittle (but see [F.25](#Rf-pass-ref-move).) -* Returning `const T&` from assignments and similar operations. +* Returning `const T&` from assignments and similar operations (see [F.47](#Rf-assignment-op).) ##### Example @@ -2873,7 +2874,7 @@ Declaring `main` (the one global `main` of a program) `void` limits portability. * The compiler should do it * If the compiler doesn't do it, let tools flag it -### F.46: Return `T&` from assignment operators. +### F.47: Return `T&` from assignment operators. ##### Reason