> On 04/04/2014 04:05 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > >Ah, yes, it is what I was discussing this with Jason, but apparently the > >discussion died out. According to his comment __cxa_pure_virtual is a > >synonym for undefined behaviour so it may be correct to unconditionally > >devirtualize here (changing runtime behaviour from terminate() to random > >method > >call), but at the moment we don't do that. Somewhere back in my head I have > >burned in from C++ lessons that calling pure virtual method should result in > >terminate () call, so I am considering __cxa_pure_virtual to be legitimate > >call > >target (as opposed to any non-function or __builtin_unreachable that I drop > >from the list). > > > >I would be happy to change this behaviour, since there are quite few extra > >cases where we could devirtualize well then. > > It's definitely undefined. > > 10.4/6: > > Member functions can be called from a constructor (or destructor) of > an abstract class; the effect of making a virtual call (10.3) to a > pure virtual function directly or indirectly for the object being > created (or destroyed) from such a constructor (or destructor) is > undefined.
OK, I will change the behaviour then, thanks! Thanks, Honza > > Jason
