Non-actual information regardng RValue life extension

[ujos]

In the For People New to C++ there is following text:

you can capture returned temporary objects from a function by constant reference to reduce the number of copy constructors

That makes sense for C++03 and maybe C++11. In case of C++14 (or better) it is possible to return value even if copy and more constructors are explicitly deleted. I mean in this case it makes no sense to extend the life of the RValue.

[ujos]

I mean that it worth to note that RValue lifetime extension is common practice for pre C++ 11

[burlachenkok]

Hi @ujos.

You did a lot of contributions, please let me know your name, surname, homepage.
I'd like to add somewhere near the title information about Editors.

[ujos]

please let me know your name, surname, homepage.

My name is Dmytro Ovdiienko

I do not have a webpage :). The best option I'm thinking of is GitHub page: https://github.com/ujos

Thanks