[llvm-bugs] [Bug 29080] New: Differences of lifetime of temporary objects during list-initialization with g++, MSVS and icpc

[via llvm-bugs]

https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=29080

            Bug ID: 29080
           Summary: Differences of lifetime of temporary objects during
                    list-initialization with g++,MSVS and icpc
           Product: clang
           Version: 3.8
          Hardware: PC
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P
         Component: C++11
          Assignee: unassignedclangbugs at nondot.org
          Reporter: noone at turm-lahnstein.de
                CC: dgregor at apple.com, llvm-bugs at lists.llvm.org
    Classification: Unclassified

Following this stackoverflow discussion
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/39025342/lifetime-of-temporary-objects-during-list-initialization

The behaviour of clang differs from the behaviour of other compilers for this
code:

#include <iostream>
#include <vector>

struct ID{ 
  static int cnt;
  // the number of living object of class ID at the moment of creation:  
  int id;

  ID():id(++cnt){}

  ~ID(){
     cnt--;
  }
};

int ID::cnt=0;

int main(){
  int arr[]{ID().id, ID().id};

  std::cout<<" Array: "<<arr[0]<<", "<<arr[1]<<"\n";
}


The clang compiled program prints out "1, 2", but programs produced by other
compilers give "1, 1".

Actually, I don't know what the right behaviour should be, but because other
compilers seem to agree, I report the bug here.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-bugs/attachments/20160821/d475a494/attachment.html>