Created on2001-07-25.00:00:00 last changed277 months ago
Proposed resolution (10/01):
Add the indicated wording to the indicated sentence in9.5 [dcl.init] paragraph 5:
A program that calls for default-initializationor value-initializationof an entity of reference type is ill-formed.
Another glitch in the TC1/core issue 178definition of value-initialization:it's no longer an error to value-initialize a reference. That makes an examplelike
typedef struct { int &r; } S;int main() { S(); // Error in C++98, okay in TC1!}valid, which has got to be wrong. See 9.5 [dcl.init] paragraph5, where there is wording that forbids default-initialization of areference, but not value-initialization thereof. As noted inissue 302, ifthe default constructor were required to be generated when avalue-initialization is done, that would force an error.| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2003-04-25 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: dr -> tc1 |
| 2002-05-10 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: review -> dr |
| 2001-11-09 00:00:00 | admin | set | messages: +msg555 |
| 2001-11-09 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: open -> review |
| 2001-07-25 00:00:00 | admin | create | |