http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52938
Abdul Tohmaz <abdul.tohmaz at emc dot com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #7 from Abdul Tohmaz <abdul.tohmaz at emc dot com> 2012-04-11 23:53:04 UTC --- Guys, I do value your points, but please consider the following: I can't always be in control when a copy is made of my string. Here is a quick example. string x; x.reserve(1024); //no memory realloc for my string up to 1024 x="aaa"; x+= "bb"; // so far no memory realloc. //now I call a function by third party library whose //signature is void doit(const string&). doit(x); x+= "cc"; //I am expecting no memory realloc here. //but in fact the last statement will reallocate memory if //doit put a copy of my string in a vector: ex //void doit (const std::string& val){ vec.push_back(val);} Don't you think this is a problem? I called reserve on x to avoid memory reallocation, and yet I am faced with memory reallocation just because I call doit; whose signature (const ref) suggests that my object should not be changed.