This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Volatile MEMs in statement expressions and functions inlined as trees
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds at transmeta dot com>
- Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 14 Dec 2001 21:02:26 +0100
- Subject: Re: Volatile MEMs in statement expressions and functions inlined as trees
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org>
Linus Torvalds <email@example.com> writes:
| On 14 Dec 2001, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > The C++ definition is pretty clear about a return value of class-type:
| > it is an rvalue.
| I'm saying that that is an arbitrary decision, not a "lack of potential".
| You _could_ imagine a language where a class member was always a lvalue.
Certainly I could imagine, and I do. But here we're talking of C++,
not an imaginary language.
| Simple example: you claim that you can create a lvalue out of an rvalue.
Not at all: You made a specific claim, I said it was wrong. Period.
| But I'll give you that some rvalues can be _promoted_ to lvalues.
There is no such rules C++. You're inventing here.