From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19537 invoked by alias); 23 Jul 2003 01:09:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 19523 invoked by uid 48); 23 Jul 2003 01:09:31 -0000 Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 01:09:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030723010931.19522.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "msimons at simons-clan dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20030722205341.11633.msimons@simons-clan.com> References: <20030722205341.11633.msimons@simons-clan.com> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/11633] g++ does not initialize structures when auto-increment variables are used X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg02672.txt.bz2 List-Id: PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11633 ------- Additional Comments From msimons at simons-clan dot com 2003-07-23 01:09 ------- For the C language, in a draft of the C99 spec around section 6.7.8 "Initialization", it talks about initialization lists. === [#23] The order in which any side effects occur among the initialization list expressions is unspecified. (121) 121 - In particular, the evaluation order need not be the same as the order of subobject initialization. === Perhaps someone with the c++ standard handy can find "initialization lists". If the same holds true for the c++ standard, then I agree this is a code bug not a compiler bug. :(