[ovao]

C++ move semantics are complicated, definitely, but Meyers actually somewhat complicated them more in the way he describes "universal references". I don't quite think that was his intention. It's not that only Meyers understands them: it's that he understands them in a way that only a language lawyer needs to.

Like your hypothetical train of thought, it just goes to show that you can complicate C++ usage a lot more than necessary. Despite all the fancy new stuff for dealing with pointers and move semantics (and lvalues, rvalues, so-called universal references, etc.), the old standby of raw pointers still do the job just as well as they always have. You can always make some kind of note to come back to something later and decide whether it makes sense to use some other kind of pointer.