🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <01BAEB16.3DF53D40@dino.int.com> Eugene Lazutkin <eugene@int.com> writes:

   > Here is part of the relevent section in the draft standard:
   > 
   > 12.2 Temporary objects
   > While evaluating an expression, it might be necessary or convenient
   > for an implementation to generate temporary objects to hold values
   > resulting from the evaluation of the expression's subexpressions.
   > During this evaluation, precisely when such temporaries are
   > introduced is unspecified.

   Well, I guess it is exactly the "not explicit enough" thing, at least
   when related to the case I described:

   Foo	foo()
   {
	   return Foo( ...... );
   }

   Foo( ..... ) is a full expression rather than subexpression. So, is the
   implementation _required_ to instantiate _this_ temporary under the
   current standard?

What do you mean with _this_ temporary?

	a) return value:   i.e. 
 
	         Foo return_value ( ..... );

or
	b) additional temporary:

	         Foo tmp( ......);
	         
	         Foo return_value(tmp);
-- 
Bernd Anhaeupl			Tel.:  +49 9131 857787
LATE - Uni Erlangen			
Cauerstr. 7			Email: anhaeupl@late.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de
91058 Erlangen

[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]