public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/103843] Direct call to Desctructor is optimized out Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 09:51:08 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-103843-4-tzogaEf4Pt@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-103843-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103843 Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|FIXED |INVALID --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Georgii.Shagov from comment #3) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > > This is undefined code. The object is officially not live after you call the > > deconstructor so GCC is able to remove the store from the deconstructor as > > being dead. > > I appreciate your reply. But this is confusing. The object was NOT released > (de-allocated). In essence Destructor is just a function. No, the destructor is not just a function in C++, it terminates the object being alive (not de-allocated though). You can then reuse the space for another object, either the same type or a different type by using the inplacement new. > Why the content of the class had been re-initialized? It was not re-initialized rather the store was removed. > IMU: there should be not such obvious difference between optimized and > non-optimized code why not, it is undefined code.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-27 9:51 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-12-27 9:21 [Bug c++/103843] New: " georgii.shagov@be-tse.de 2021-12-27 9:33 ` [Bug c++/103843] " georgii.shagov@be-tse.de 2021-12-27 9:38 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-12-27 9:44 ` georgii.shagov@be-tse.de 2021-12-27 9:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2021-12-27 12:03 ` georgii.shagov@be-tse.de 2021-12-27 12:08 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-12-27 16:38 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-12-27 16:41 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-103843-4-tzogaEf4Pt@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).