http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51296
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> 2011-11-25 15:55:36 UTC --- > --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-11-25 > 15:17:09 UTC --- > ah so the scan-assembler test is finding the stabs info, not actually a call > to > the constructor Right. I see we already have a few -g0's in constexpr.cc tests: libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/unique_ptr/cons/constexpr.cc:// { dg-options "-std=gnu++0x -fno-inline -save-temps -g0" } libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/shared_ptr/cons/constexpr.cc:// { dg-options "-std=gnu++0x -fno-inline -save-temps -g0" } libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/weak_ptr/cons/constexpr.cc:// { dg-options "-std=gnu++0x -fno-inline -save-temps -g0" } libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/enable_shared_from_this/cons/constexpr.cc:// { dg-options "-std=gnu++0x -fno-inline -save-temps -g0" } This was done for PR libstdc++/46869, the same issue. Rainer