[mehrdadn]

unique_ptr's destructor happens to do nothing in a moved-from state. The fact that some types behave this way does not mean moves are destructive. They're still non-destructive. Indeed you're still supposed to call the destructor after a move, and the destructor very well _could_ do something in general. It's just that it doesn't happen to make any difference for typical implementations of some types like unique_ptr.

In fact there are people who have wanted destructive moves in C++, because they found the current non-destructive moves inadequate, but I don't believe the feature has ever been added. Look up destructive moves to find discussions on the issue.

[dragontamer]

I guess I'm being imprecise with terminology then. It seems like Rust has a concept called destructive move, which is not what I'm talking about.

In any case, the "foo" vector, and "foo" unique_ptr are _mutilated_ as part of the std::move operation. (Since the word "destroyed" seems to have been taken by the Rust community, I can't use that word anymore... hopefully no other community has taken the word "mutilated")

[gpderetta]

I think "moved-from" already captures what you are trying to say.

The theoretical destructive move is understood not leave an object behind at all, i.e. nothing to call a destructor on.