From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 17CE13858401; Fri, 21 Apr 2023 10:41:05 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 17CE13858401 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1682073665; bh=IrcHmui4C+ZUn3RdtPDVd7tFuXrwPvtbiLWnDuCxh1A=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=i9w/QYDCkyfBVz4i+D6ub20Igc/ZoZuiR6yZ6Dj1hKWPFRhgDIbRcvoFSkKJsTfxO TZScmx3K7JkK4jmZam7drhfSdwLgkIdEC0iaf3IUdTqSyRqdsHiMeyweObOiVeoMcZ fafPn1fQn9enyzJkHNb0oN90bqVY885al2Pp58U8= From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/108993] Value initialization does not occur for derived class , for gcc versions > 5 Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2023 10:41:04 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D108993 --- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely --- I don't see any ambiguity: "otherwise, the object is zero-initialized and the semantic constraints for default-initialization are checked, **and** if T has a non-trivial default constructor, the object is default-initialized;" It doesn't say zero-init OR default-init, it very clearly says zero-init AND default-init.=