Not Const Temporaries

[Alexandre Oliva]

On May  3, 2001, Philippe Cizaire <pci@silicomp.com> wrote:

> It works fine (but it costs me 2 uneeded temporaries that lead to at
> least 4 syscalls... snif).

Huh?  It shouldn't require any additional temporaries.  How does the
new member function look like?

> Is there a way to tell gcc to accept to take non const reference to
> temporaries ?

Perhaps with -fpermissive, but I wouldn't recommend using it.  This
option is to let old code compile; you shouldn't write new code that
violates the C++ Standard.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist    *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me