------- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-24 18:42 ------- Richard, I'm sorry, I realize now that I'm confused about an important point: does your analysis of function::swap mean that we are *already* miscompiling it? Or, are we going to commit patches which will lead to miscompilations in 4.5?
Because otherwise, I don't really think it makes sense to have an interim version of the code using std::memcpy (at least not for the C+0x version): for 4.6.0 we could as well move directly to the optimized but correct solution - in other terms we didn't really understand each other the last week, and this issue should not depend on 42834, on your 42845 instead and should be targeted to 4.6.0. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42832
