https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110102
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > We shouldn't be doing this transformation here, because A is a > program-defined type and we don't know its properties. True, though I wouldn't expect that to matter; for any sensible program I'd expect it to be a good thing that we only construct the element directly, rather than construct a temporary A and then copy it into the element. This seems in the spirit of [class.copy.elision], though I agree that this situation is not actually covered by that clause. Perhaps it should be.
