Must use implementation details to return move-only types

[Dave Abrahams]

I can't directly return a move-only type and must instead return boost::detail::thread_move_t<…>. That should be improved/fixed. It is possible to write move emulation that allows them to be returned directly.

[viboes]

I have moved it to support until the issue is clarified. Please could you be more explicit?

[anonymous]

Take any move-only type from the library and try to return it from a function, using only documented APIs. For me it fails unless I use something from namespace detail. It's been a while, so I don't have the code handy, but is this clear enough?

[viboes]

Please could you provide a short test? This is a way to help the Boost community.

[Dave Abrahams]

Replying to viboes:

Please could you provide a short test? This is a way to help the Boost community.

Not that I often pass up an opportunity to help the Boost community, but I don't think I'll have time to build one anytime soon. That said, you have all the info here that you should need to write one yourself.

[viboes]

There is an action point to use Boost.Move. Could we consider this as a duplicate of #6194 Adapt to Boost.Move.

[viboes]

Documentation has been added for the new Boost.Move move semantics and the old one.

Committed in release branch at [78543]