--- Comment #4 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-07 19:45 ---
Neither 4.4.1 nor 4.5 try to call the copy constructor in your example; I
believe I fixed this issue in 4.4.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-07-08 11:41
---
Note, in general work on C++0x features doesn't really belong to Bugzilla,
unless existing code crashes on new testcases, things like that. You understand
that in general the situation would otherwise quickly
--- Comment #2 from dragan at plusplus dot co dot yu 2009-07-08 12:38
---
Although this is a feature request in the context that the old behavior
was correctly implemented and it will be different in C++0x, it still presents
a bug in the current C++0x implementation. It creates copies
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-07-08 12:47
---
To be clear, I'm not telling you anything specific about the development
process. Actually, that's exactly the point, this is ongoing development of
experimental features, no guarantees, no guarantees of
