On 19 February 2016 at 14:35, Michael Matz <[email protected]> wrote: > struct S { > S() {something();} > }; > > would be an empty type, and that's not what we want.
Why not? The default constructor is never invoked as part of passing such an object around. Its copy constructor is a nop and requires no reference to the original object. Matthijs van Duin _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
