Have a look at the following code:
#include
#include Besides other answers of providing move (assignment) constructor, you could also store the non-copyable object through pointer, especially unique_ptr. unique_ptr will handle resource movement for you.
[This is a complete rewrite. My earlier answer had nothing to do with the problem.]
The map has two relevant insert overloads:
insert(const value_type& value), and
<template typename P> insert(P&& value).
When you use the simple list-initializer map.insert({1, non_copyable()});, all possible overloads are considered. But only the first one (the one taking const value_type&) is found, since the other doesn't make sense (there's no way to magically guess that you meant to create a pair). The first overload doesn't work of course since your element isn't copyable.
You can make the second overload work by creating the pair explicitly, either with make_pair, as you already described, or by naming the value type explicitly:
typedef std::map<int, non_copyable> map_type;
map_type m;
m.insert(map_type::value_type({1, non_copyable()}));
Now the list-initializer knows to look for map_type::value_type constructors, finds the relevant movable one, and the result is an rvalue pair which binds to the P&&-overload of the insert function.
(Another option is to use emplace() with piecewise_construct and forward_as_tuple, though that would get a lot more verbose.)
I suppose the moral here is that list-initializers look for viable overloads – but they have to know what to look for!