[FastPR][Core] Missing move constructor and assignment in sparse graphs

[rubenzorrilla]

📝 Description
Adding the missing move constructor and move assignment operator to the SparseContiguousRowGraph and SparseGraph classes.

[loumalouomega]

You can extend the doc: https://kratosmultiphysics.github.io/Kratos/pages/Kratos/For_Developers/Data_Structures/SparseGraph.html and https://kratosmultiphysics.github.io/Kratos/pages/Kratos/For_Developers/Data_Structures/DistributedSparseGraph.html

[RiccardoRossi]

on my side i would approve, but i let @matekelemen doint it.

[matekelemen]

thx 👌

Just one comment for future reference; I wouldn't want to re-trigger the CI for something so trivial:

/// Assignment operator
SparseGraph& operator=(SparseGraph const& rOther)=delete;

I want to make it clear to everyone writing annotations: unless they're doing something non-standard, there is no point in documenting built-in functions.

Why? Exactly because they're doing something standard. Anyone looking at the signature should already know what that function does, and how it's supposed to behave.

If you start annotating these standard functions, you'll have to explicitly define every auto-generated constructor / assignment operator / destructor and annotate them the same way you do here to be consistent. That'd lead to an unbelievably bloated code base and documentation. They're defined by the standard and auto-generated by the compiler for a reason.

[rubenzorrilla]

thx 👌

Just one comment for future reference; I wouldn't want to re-trigger the CI for something so trivial:

/// Assignment operator
SparseGraph& operator=(SparseGraph const& rOther)=delete;

I want to make it clear to everyone writing annotations: unless they're doing something non-standard, there is no point in documenting built-in functions.

Why? Exactly because they're doing something standard. Anyone looking at the signature should already know what that function does, and how it's supposed to behave.

If you start annotating these standard functions, you'll have to explicitly define every auto-generated constructor / assignment operator / destructor and annotate them the same way you do here to be consistent. That'd lead to an unbelievably bloated code base and documentation. They're defined by the standard and auto-generated by the compiler for a reason.

I totally agree. It's pretty annoying documenting this just to keep consistency with the rest of files.