[Bug c++/107132] New: a temporary object with an x-value is not destroyed and is bound to a variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107132 Bug ID: 107132 Summary: a temporary object with an x-value is not destroyed and is bound to a variable Product: gcc Version: 12.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severit

[Bug c++/109529] New: the r-value volatile object is not accepted by the l-value volatile constant argument.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109529 Bug ID: 109529 Summary: the r-value volatile object is not accepted by the l-value volatile constant argument. Product: gcc Version: 12.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/109529] the r-value volatile object is not accepted by the l-value volatile constant argument.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109529 --- Comment #3 from Lisp2D --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > Since `static_cast(x)` is considered rvalue and `int I can't find a reason anywhere in the standard why the volatile property prevents conversion from `&&` to `const &`

[Bug c++/109529] the r-value volatile object is not accepted by the l-value volatile constant argument.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109529 --- Comment #6 from Lisp2D --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40193008/why-a-const-volatile-reference- stackoverflow offers to link an rvalue reference to a variable for this. But I think this

[Bug c++/109529] the r-value volatile object is not accepted by the l-value volatile constant argument.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109529 --- Comment #7 from Lisp2D --- .. or int volatile && rx = static_cast < int volatile && > ( x ) ; fun(rx);