https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109443
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #14)
> If that's valid then all bets for this PR are off since f() then
> _can_ change v.size ().
Well, in C++ the ctors are typically defined inline, so if we wanted and they
would be inline the FE could do some quick check whether the ctor could leak
the this address or some address derived from it and we could do the
optimization only if we prove that the copy constructor (and default
constructor?) doesn't do this.
CCing Jonathan on whether it is valid.
