[Bug c++/70551] member function of template instantiated even though only declaration is needed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70551 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Hmm, on the trunk C++11 and C++14 still do the instantiation but C++17 and > C++20 do not. Was there a change in the C++ standard around this area, > maybe a defect report? Note clang has the same behavior as GCC does with respect to the C++ standard versions too.
[Bug c++/70551] member function of template instantiated even though only declaration is needed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70551 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Hmm, on the trunk C++11 and C++14 still do the instantiation but C++17 and C++20 do not. Was there a change in the C++ standard around this area, maybe a defect report?
[Bug c++/70551] member function of template instantiated even though only declaration is needed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70551 --- Comment #2 from Roland B --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > Your interpretation would mean that whether a compiler performs copy elision > would change whether a program is well-formed or not (rather than only > changing whether any side effects of the constructor call happen). That is > not a reasonable interpretation IMHO. I see your point, but when I remove the definition from the code, it compiles just fine, because the definition is irrelevant in case of copy elision. So I could have the move constructor's declaration in file A and the definition in file B. If the definition is irrelevant, why would it matter whether or not I include the file B containing the definition?
[Bug c++/70551] member function of template instantiated even though only declaration is needed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70551 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Your interpretation would mean that whether a compiler performs copy elision would change whether a program is well-formed or not (rather than only changing whether any side effects of the constructor call happen). That is not a reasonable interpretation IMHO.
