On Wednesday, October 29, 2025, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:

>
>
> You are of course free to say that this doesn't match your mental model of
> triviality; nor the (non-standard) pre-existing practice in many libraries;
> nor even the new practice (e.g. Proxy v3).
>
> I'd even agree with such a position; that's why I wrote P3780.
>
>

This reminds of the back-and-forth I had about __uint128_t and why it's
bigger than uintmax_t.

(Point No. 1) __uint128_t is a type
(Point No. 2) __uint128_t stores an integer
(Point No. 3) __uint128_t is not an integer type

I'm not keen on bending of the English language . . . reminds me of how the
Northern-most county of Ireland is said to be in the South.

If the relocation of an object involves the invocation of a hash algorithm
or an encryption algorithm, then 'trivial' is a very poor choice of word.
Maybe something more suitable like "has_specialized_relocation_algorithm".
But even with that, I would argue that the invocation of a
hashing/encryption algorithm is tantamount to "having a specialised
relocation algorithm".

So maybe a better term would be "custom_written" or "custom_composed", or
better yet: "custom_implemented".

So we would say that std::string, in the short string optimization mode,
has a custom-implemented relocation algorithm:

     std::has_custom_implemented_relocator

And we could then reserve the meaning of "is_trivially_reloctable" to mean
that you can do a memcpy without editing any bits.