On Thursday, August 18, 2011 13:33 Trass3r wrote: > Am 18.08.2011, 22:19 Uhr, schrieb Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com>: > > Yeah. I don't understand why a struct literal would be an lvalue. It's a > > temporary. What possible value does it have? It's not a variable. It > > doesn't > > refer to a variable. Why would you be able to assign to anything which > > is not > > a variable (or indirectly refers to one - e.g. with ref)? > > I don't understand it either. > It only makes sense with const ref.
It doesn't even make sense with const ref IMHO - not unless you're going to allow const ref to be bound to temporaries in general. I see _zero_ reason to treat a newly constructed object as any different from one which is returned from a function. It just confuses things. And in a sense, a newly constructed object _is_ returned by a function, it's just that it's the constructor rather than a normal function. - Jonathan M Davis
