Why isn't the copy constructor elided here?
- by Jesse Beder
(I'm using gcc with -O2.)
This seems like a straightforward opportunity to elide the copy constructor, since there are no side-effects to accessing the value of a field in a bar's copy of a foo; but the copy constructor is called, since I get the output meep meep!.
#include <iostream>
struct foo {
foo(): a(5) { }
foo(const foo& f):…
