From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id ECEE3386F425; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 00:03:38 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org ECEE3386F425 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1587427418; bh=n/aLPZq719JG2GQOz8gsnGBXS4HClPpGCcdHh75Wig8=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=L/kyPym8vsWHriV+dFGhBiB9kLwTRprkFNVjtA6FmmMzB4ic0IhQLxRksN6Mq7Svn ucgz/a76k9xr2zk6RpJdnSxKOh9iFWAdboJ5oP+bkP3KnMbYLWtckFOvWiJTu51iAj 54gcT0q8RoP4MnY+ESsqfy9Q7LqT07h+HdTkOfKw= From: "mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/90254] [8/9/10 Regression] ice on aggregate initialization of unmovable base Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 00:03:38 +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: 8.3.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.5 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 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 00:03:39 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D90254 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- But this one is accepted by icc/clang++ yet we ICE: struct A { A(); A(const A &); }; struct B : A { }; A foo (); int main () { B b{foo()}; }=