https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
Václav Zeman vhaisman at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vhaisman at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Václav Zeman from comment #13)
This bug appears to be affecting 4.7.x series as well. Is there a chance to
get this fixed for 4.7 as well?
No, the 4.7 branch is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue May 13 16:05:01 2014
New Revision: 210381
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210381root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/60367
* call.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||reichelt at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Mar 10 21:06:59 2014
New Revision: 208465
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208465root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/60367
* call.c (convert_default_arg):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
--- Comment #4 from rob.desbois at gmail dot com ---
The problem only seems to occur when using the pattern = {} to default the
parameter; = foo{} and = foo() don't seem to provoke the differing
addresses.
I have confirmed that member data set in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
--- Comment #5 from rob.desbois at gmail dot com ---
The following is a side-by-side diff of the disassembly of the incorrect
version vs. a correct version (defaulting the parameter with = foo{}). The
object foo has a single member of type char
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
--- Comment #1 from rob.desbois at gmail dot com ---
...having realised that this might look like I just don't grok move
construction I expanded my test - adding copy move constructors assignment
operators to foo and re-running the test still
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Possibly the same issue as Bug 59713
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
--- Comment #3 from rob.desbois at gmail dot com ---
Adding a destructor didn't fix it for me - though it was destroyed for the same
address as the constructed object.
constructed foo @ 0x7fffa012e5ef
default argument is at 0x7fffa012e5d0
16 matches
Mail list logo
