[Bug middle-end/88175] GCC should not warn within implicit copy-constructor (or should report the implicit function in a special way)

[jg at jguk dot org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88175

--- Comment #20 from Jonny Grant <jg at jguk dot org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #19)
> Why is that needed? It says the location is something like:
> 
> In member function ‘info& info::operator=(const info&)’,
> 
> or:
> 
> In copy constructor ‘info::info(const info&)’,
> 
> If that isn't explicitly defined in the class, then obviously it's being
> defined implicitly by the compiler. That property of C++ should not surprise
> anybody.

You're point is valid. Highlighting it is implicitly generated is purely an
informative diagnostic.

I've been on C++ teams where certain software engineers weren't aware of
implicitly generated constructors.