From -2061430046592664164 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,8dda5aaabdd0a59f X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public From: Tom Payne Subject: Re: "int x = x;" or "T t(t);" is OK? Date: 1996/11/01 Message-ID: <55b91v$7l4@skylark.ucr.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 193724503 references: <558kj7$iil@toralf.uib.no> <55ah0g$1gp0@news.rchland.ibm.com> x-original-date: 31 Oct 1996 22:26:07 GMT organization: University of California, Riverside x-auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++ newsgroups: comp.std.c++ originator: fjh@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU Bill Seurer wrote: : In article <558kj7$iil@toralf.uib.no>, boukanov@sentef2.fi.uib.no : (Igor Boukanov) writes: : |> From the current DWP point of view is it possible to write: : |> int x = x; : |> T t(t); : |> : |> where T has copy constructor? : |> : |> I found that many C++ compilers accept the code without any warnings. : |> And of cause very unfortunately from C point it is OK. : Semantically and syntactically they are correct but of course they are : probably coding errors. I hope that the standard specifies that objects thus initialized have indeterminate and possibly illegal values, so that their subsequent use (other than assigning them legitimate values) yields undefined behavior. Tom Payne --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles: try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html ] [ Policy: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ] [ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu ]