From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19667 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2003 17:46:02 -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 19653 invoked by uid 71); 27 Mar 2003 17:46:02 -0000 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 17:56:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030327174601.19652.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Andreas Schwab Subject: Re: c++/10245: [3.3/3.4 regression] ?: operator requires public copy constructor of return type Reply-To: Andreas Schwab X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg01922.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c++/10245; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Andreas Schwab To: bangerth@dealii.org Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, harri.pasanen@trema.com, jean-paul_marinier@hp.com, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, tot@trema.com, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/10245: [3.3/3.4 regression] ?: operator requires public copy constructor of return type Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 18:43:49 +0100 bangerth@dealii.org writes: |> Apparently it wants to make a copy of the return arguments. |> Since at least in Standard C++ (not in Gnu C++) ?: returns |> an rvalue, I don't think this is necessary. ?: returns an lvalue if both expressions have the same type. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."