[Bug c++/39126] Missing move constructor call (C++0x rvalue references)

2009-05-08 Thread gbrammer at gmx dot de 


--- Comment #3 from gbrammer at gmx dot de  2009-05-08 19:17 ---
Well, I am sure that it shouldn't be created, but rereading the spec
(http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2118.html 12.8) I
noticed that this bug is not in g++, but by design.
I had hoped that rvalue references were a replacement for the ability to pass
temporaries to non-const references present in g++ up to version 4.1 and
Microsoft's C++ compilers, but apparently one has to be very very careful using
them. Well, at least I now only have to worry about the code, not the compiler.


-- 

gbrammer at gmx dot de changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||INVALID


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39126

[Bug c++/39126] Missing move constructor call (C++0x rvalue references)

2009-05-07 Thread gbrammer at gmx dot de 


--- Comment #1 from gbrammer at gmx dot de  2009-05-07 19:05 ---
Still happens with g++-4.4 (Debian 4.4.0-4) 4.4.1.

Here's a version with printfs in the destructor and constructors:

extern C { int printf(const char *format, ...); }
struct Foo {
Foo(Foo  from) { printf(move constructor\n); }
Foo() { printf(constructor\n); }
~Foo() { printf(destructor\n); }
/*private:
Foo(const Foo  from) { printf(copy constructor\n); }*/
};
Foo CreateFoo(bool b) {
  Foo f;
  if (b) return Foo();
  return f;
}
int main () {
Foo f(CreateFoo(false));
}


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39126

[Bug c++/39126] Missing move constructor call (C++0x rvalue references)

2009-05-07 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-05-07 19:09 ---
Are you sure that an implicit copy constructor is not supposed to be created
here?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39126