[RFA] Algorithms vs operator* and operator==

[Chris Jefferson]

Paolo Carlini wrote:

> chris wrote:
>
>> This seems to be the line we have trouble with, as it could lead to 
>> an expensive copy. I haven't fully tested it yet, but I wonder if 
>> this line would be better expressed as:
>> typeof(*__first) __value = *__first; (where I've only just found 
>> typeof).
>>
>> I've done some benchmarks, and I'm reasonably convinced that this is 
>> both safe and the most efficent way of doing things. If *__first is a 
>> reference, we just store the reference and access it twice. If 
>> *__first is returned by value, then we only get it by value once and 
>> use it twice. Does this seem safe / sensible?
>
>
> Hi Chris, today I noticed this thread:
>
>    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-01/msg01640.html
>
> Not nice...
>
No, which is a shame, as knowing if something is being passed by 
reference or value could be very useful...

Chris