http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55098
--- Comment #1 from Lisp2D lisp2d at lisp2d dot net 2012-10-27 15:01:42 UTC
---
May be it is optimisation, but without instruction and with side effects.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55098
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55098
Lisp2D lisp2d at lisp2d dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55098
--- Comment #4 from Lisp2D lisp2d at lisp2d dot net 2012-10-27 15:24:06 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #3)
My opinion is to enable elide-constructors in -sdt=c++11.
Programers in this standard use own move-constructors with own-side
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55098
--- Comment #5 from Lisp2D lisp2d at lisp2d dot net 2012-10-27 15:46:39 UTC
---
OK. Right path is: DON'T return anything.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55098
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55098
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-27
16:03:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_value_optimization
Use -fno-elide-constructors to disable constructor elision
And