[c++0x] cannot return a constant

[Jonathan Wakely]

On 30 November 2010 21:45, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Roman Kononov <roman@binarylife.net> wrote:
>> 2010-11-30 21:20 CST, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> said:
>>>We do. The point is your question is off-topic on this list, because
>>>you are complaining about the C++0x language, which as far as we know
>>>GCC implements correctly.  If you don't like the language, complain
>>>somewhere else.
>>>
>>
>> Then please tell me which part of the standard makes the mentioned code
>> invalid?
>>
>> I'm not complaining and I like the language. My point is that I'm trying
>> to find a loophole in the standard so that g++, without violating the
>> standard, could allow move-and-destroy of constants.
>
> if you are trying to find a loophole in the standard, then:
>   1. I would have expected that you are studying the
>       standard, and therefore can cite appropriate
>       references that support your interpretation
>
>   2. if you make the premise that g++ correctly implements
>       the standard, then you should be asking your questions
>       in C++ standards forums as they clearly are not about
>       GCC development
>
>   3. there are better ways of using people's times than making
>       a statement (not supported by anything) and asking them to prove
>       your wrong.

I was going to refer to the relevant paragraph in the standard but I
prefer this answer, thanks, Gaby.