On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, 01:21 Kagamin via Digitalmars-d, <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 12 October 2024 at 08:06:16 UTC, Manu wrote:
> 4. rvalue constructors exist and are used, and are NOT move
> constructors
>
>
> They are rvalue constructors; it doesn't matter what they do,
> their selection criteria remains identical.
>
> I could similarly write your a copy constructors that doesn't
> make a copy... that's my prerogative.

You mean rvalue constructors that duplicate their argument are
just incorrectly implemented move constructors?

No, that's not what I mean. It's just "a constructor", and you're the master of your code. Write it to do whatever it needs to do!