rjmccall added a comment.
In D45898#1324625 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D45898#1324625>, @orivej wrote:
> I have noticed that this change breaks seemingly valid code:
>
> class A { protected: ~A(); };
> struct B : A {};
> B f() { return B(); }
> B g() { return {}; }
>
>
> `f` compiles, but `g` fails with `temporary of type 'A' has protected
> destructor`. (g++ 8.2 compiles this file.)
We talked about this in the analysis for https://reviews.llvm.org/D53860, and
Richard decided that it is indeed invalid under the standard.
As a language designer I'm not sure that's a good language rule, but it's the
realm of a standard defect, not a compiler bug.
Repository:
rC Clang
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D45898/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D45898
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
