I have tried to determine what happens in move assignment of fixed size Eigen::Matrix
variables with the following code
Eigen::Vector3d from;
Eigen::Vector3d to;
from << 1, 2, 3;
to << 9, 9, 9;
std::cout << from.data() << std::endl;
std::cout << from.transpose() << std::endl;
std::cout << to.data() << std::endl;
std::cout << to.transpose() << std::endl;
to = std::move(from);
std::cout << from.data() << std::endl;
std::cout << from.transpose() << std::endl;
std::cout << to.data() << std::endl;
std::cout << to.transpose() << std::endl;
This code has output that looks like this
// Before
0x7ffee50bcee0 // from
1 2 3
0x7ffee50bcf00 // to
9 9 9
// After
0x7ffee50bcee0 // from
9 9 9
0x7ffee50bcf00 // to
1 2 3
This would seem to indicate that move assignment does a "copying" swap (which I would expect to be more expensive than a copy assignment) since the addresses of the underlying data do not change but the values do. Can someone confirm this is the case? My goal is really to determine whether I will be losing efficiency if I make a class with an Eigen::Matrix
member that implements copy assignment but not move assignment (other than any efficiency losses I would incur from the inability to take advantage of the lazy evaluation of the Eigen library of course).
For additional reference, if I switch from
and to
to be of type Eigen::VectorXd
then I get output that looks like this
//Before
0x558f77b8be70 // from
1 2 3
0x558f77b8be90 // to
9 9 9
// After
0x558f77b8be90 // from
9 9 9
0x558f77b8be70 // to
1 2 3
This would indicate that the underlying data pointers are being swapped in the move (and therefore move assignment is more efficient than copy assignment for dynamic Eigen matrices).
Please login or Register to submit your answer