From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3088 invoked by alias); 9 Apr 2002 16:40:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 3068 invoked by uid 61); 9 Apr 2002 16:40:14 -0000 Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 09:40:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020409164014.3067.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, gwesp@cosy.sbg.ac.at, nobody@gcc.gnu.org From: jason@gcc.gnu.org Reply-To: jason@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, gwesp@cosy.sbg.ac.at, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/4683: constructor executed at least twice X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00538.txt.bz2 List-Id: Synopsis: constructor executed at least twice State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback State-Changed-By: jason State-Changed-When: Tue Apr 9 09:40:13 2002 State-Changed-Why: Your bug report doesn't mention actual bad code semantics; the gdb behavior you mention is common for optimized code. It may not be ideal, but it's not a bug either. http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=4683