On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Roman Kononov <ro...@binarylife.net> wrote:
> 2010-11-30 21:20 CST, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely....@gmail.com> said:
>>We do. The point is your question is off-topic on this list, because
>>you are complaining about the C++0x language, which as far as we know
>>GCC implements correctly. If you don't like the language, complain
>>somewhere else.
>>
>
> Then please tell me which part of the standard makes the mentioned code
> invalid?
>
> I'm not complaining and I like the language. My point is that I'm trying
> to find a loophole in the standard so that g++, without violating the
> standard, could allow move-and-destroy of constants.
if you are trying to find a loophole in the standard, then:
1. I would have expected that you are studying the
standard, and therefore can cite appropriate
references that support your interpretation
2. if you make the premise that g++ correctly implements
the standard, then you should be asking your questions
in C++ standards forums as they clearly are not about
GCC development
3. there are better ways of using people's times than making
a statement (not supported by anything) and asking them to prove
your wrong.
