Failing test when run as C++11

[Jonathan Wakely]

On 09/05/14 13:15 +0200, Daniel Krügler wrote:
>2014-05-09 12:53 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>:
>> 20_util/specialized_algorithms/uninitialized_copy/808590.cc fails if
>> run in C++11 mode because is_nothrow_move_constructible<c> is false,
>> which means vector::resize() copies the elements using non-const
>> lvalue arguments, which selects the template constructor.
>>
>> (In C++03 it copies from *const* lvalue arguments, selecting the copy
>> constructor.)
>>
>> We can either fix it by adding throw() to the copy constructor, or by
>> adding a move cosntructor (with a comment explaining why):
>>
>> #if __cplusplus >= 201103L
>>   c(c&&) = default;
>> #endif
>>
>> I can't decide which I prefer, does anyone else have a preference?
>
>Do you know whether the test case was added to validate a bug fix and
>if so, which one? I would like to ensure that the change still
>reflects the original intention for adding it.

See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=808590

That was filed against Red Hat's GCC 4.4 and at the time the upstream
GCC already passed the test. Benjamin added the test to catch any
regressions. Arguably, the C++11 behaviour (copying from non-const
lvalue instead of const lvalue) can be considered a regression, but I
think it's the correct behaviour.