http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19729
Bug ID: 19729
Summary: List initialization of placement parameter produces
spurious complaint regarding deleted copy/move
constructors
Product: clang
Version: 3.4
Hardware: Other
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P
Component: C++11
Assignee: [email protected]
Reporter: [email protected]
CC: [email protected], [email protected]
Classification: Unclassified
List initialization by constructor involves no copy/move operation on the
result of the constructor selected by overload resolution; however, when used
in the placement arguments of a new-expression, Clang apparently tries to
perform a copy.
GCC does not have an issue with the deleted copy and move constructors.
### SOURCE:> cat clangListInitNewPlacement.cc
struct A {
A(int);
A(const A &) = delete;
A(A &&) = delete;
~A();
};
struct B {
static void *operator new(decltype(sizeof(0)), A);
static void operator delete(void *, A);
};
void bar() {
new ({0}) B;
}
Return: 0x00:0
### COMPILER INVOCATION AND OUTPUT:> clang++ -std=c++11
clangListInitNewPlacement.cc -c
clangListInitNewPlacement.cc:14:9: error: call to deleted constructor of 'A'
new ({0}) B;
^~
clangListInitNewPlacement.cc:4:4: note: function has been explicitly marked
deleted here
A(A &&) = delete;
^
clangListInitNewPlacement.cc:9:52: note: passing argument to parameter here
static void *operator new(decltype(sizeof(0)), A);
^
1 error generated.
Return: 0x01:1
### EXPECTED OUTPUT:
Clean compile.
### VERSION INFO:> clang++ -v
clang version 3.4 (tags/RELEASE_34/final)
Target: powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
Found candidate GCC installation: /usr/lib/gcc/ppc64-redhat-linux/4.4.4
Found candidate GCC installation: /usr/lib/gcc/ppc64-redhat-linux/4.4.6
Selected GCC installation: /usr/lib/gcc/ppc64-redhat-linux/4.4.6
Return: 0x00:0
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
LLVMbugs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmbugs