On 04/25/2012 10:25 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Thus, the below elementary patch appears to work fine (I also double checked that in such cases the type remains trivial). It's all there is to it?
Unfortunately, I don't think so; there's a lot of code in the compiler that assumes that trivial constructors are also always callable. However, that might not be as big an issue for the copy constructor as it is for the default constructor, since copies go through overload resolution. So I guess if this patch passes the testsuite it's OK.
Jason
