Bugs/non-portable assumptions in libstdc++

[Paolo Carlini]

Chris Lattner wrote:

>I'm sorry I wasn't clear.  In particular, I specifically mean non-POD
>objects.  The reference above seems to really to only apply to POD objects
>that don't have constructors.
>  
>
I don't think so, because the reference I gave is the *beginning* of 
3.6.2 and the
whole 3.6 is certainly not about POD generally (POD types are introduced 
later,
in 3.9). Also, POD are specifically mentioned (with a forward reference 
to 3.9),
later in the paragraph, for some specific details.

>In particular, 12.6.2.4 (in 14882-2003b) says:
>
>"...
>After the call to a constructor for class X has completed, if a member of
>X is neither specified in the constructors mem-initializers, nor
>default-initialized, nor value-initialized, nor given a value during
>execution of the body of the constructor, the member has indeterminate
>value."
>  
>
Whereas *this* paragraph begins with "If a given nonstatic data 
member... " ;)

Paolo.