"moving" meaning "using std::move" meaning casting to an rvalue
reference, let's not point such things out when we know what we are
talking about :/


> I don't think your std:: expected example works, it didn't have a
conversion operator. What you want is just std:: move(*exp) or
*std::move(exp).

My std::expected example does not currently work, but std::move_as opens
a possibility for std::expected to implement such a conversion.
std::move(*myExpected) works, but std::move_as<Value>(myExpected) seems
cleaner to me.

> And your string example works with just static_cast<std::string&&>(obj).

And no, static_cast<std::string&&>(obj) does not work.

On 04.06.2025 11:08, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2025, 09:03 Tymi via Std-Proposals,
> <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> I find the move_as example more intuitive and generally "safer".
> Also my first thought was that std::string(std::move(c)) copied
> c._value and created a new object out of it, instead of just
> moving c._value.
>
>
> You seem to be saying "moving" when you mean "casting to rvalue
> reference", which is not moving.
>
>
> I don't think your std:: expected example works, it didn't have a
> conversion operator. What you want is just std:: move(*exp) or
> *std::move(exp).
>
> And your string example works with just static_cast<std::string&&>(obj).
>
> So I think the existing solutions are fine.
>
>