http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53220
--- Comment #7 from davidxl <xinliangli at gmail dot com> 2012-05-07 17:03:51 UTC --- Yes, the array case should be warned or disallowed if 1 is the way to go. I won't call it a lousy choice -- the C++ semantics of the compound literals allow more agressive optimization and smaller stack usage. David (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > > 1) to keep the current G++ semantics of compound literals, but change its > > behavior due to the implementation change (with clobber marker); > > I would argue that 1 is completely useless for "you can also construct an > array" use case from http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Compound-Literals.html > > It always initializes the pointer with dangling storage, and is always a bug. > > If "keep the current g++ semantics", then the code should be rejected at > compile time, and should *not* work when built without optimization. > > IMO, having this code working in C and not working in C++ is a lousy choice.
