https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=127540

--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to François Dumont from comment #7)
> What about fixing it this way ?

Would this mean that a copy of a moved-from iterator would be in the
value-initialized state, but the moved-from iterator itself would not be?

> IMHO to detect that iterator's lifetime hasn't started yet is a compiler's
> job, not _GLIBCXX_DEBUG mode one.

A nice idea in theory, but impossible in practice because C++ supports separate
compilation.

Reply via email to