From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11635 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2004 20:10:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 11621 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2004 20:10:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fep06-app.kolumbus.fi) (193.229.0.57) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 26 Nov 2004 20:10:16 -0000 Received: from [192.168.0.101] (really [84.230.64.80]) by fep06-app.kolumbus.fi with ESMTP id <20041126201015.DBUU21007.fep06-app.kolumbus.fi@[192.168.0.101]> for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 22:10:15 +0200 From: Mikael =?iso-8859-1?q?Kilpel=E4inen?= To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Passing temprary by reference requires copy constructor in 3.4? Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 21:41:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.1 References: <20041126191040.GD9325@ee.ethz.ch> <200411262155.02799.mikael.kilpelainen@kolumbus.fi> <416BE1A0-3FE6-11D9-941D-000A95D692F4@physics.uc.edu> In-Reply-To: <416BE1A0-3FE6-11D9-941D-000A95D692F4@physics.uc.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200411262210.14153.mikael.kilpelainen@kolumbus.fi> X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg01041.txt.bz2 On Friday 26 November 2004 22:03, Andrew Pinski wrote: > Why, the DR is still active so GCC is correct as of right now. > If and when the DR goes to defect, we will implement the needed > change. But currently GCC is following the standard. Yes, I was not saying that gcc is wrong. That was not my intention, I just wanted to point out that it is likely to happen and the flag could be helpful for certain people. Of course I might be wrong. I just saw fine opportunity to talk about this :) Mikael