------- Comment #6 from kkylheku at gmail dot com 2009-12-11 11:57 ------- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > > But I'm not convinced that doing this is always a mistake. > > > > Since we don't care about the object, we must care about the constructor > > side > > effect. I seem to be under the impression that ISO C++ allows the > > construction > > of temporary objects to be optimized away---even if there are side effects > > in > > the constructor or destructor! Therefore, it's hard to see a valid use case > > for > > this. > Certain temporaries (such as those created during copying or reference > binding) > can be optimised away, I don't think it's true of temporaries created > explicitly like this.
I've gone over the relevant 14882:2003 sections and have come to the same conclusion. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36587
