Hi,

On Fri, 19 Feb 2016, Richard Smith wrote:

> >> > The trivially copyable is gone again.  Why is it not necessary?
> >>
> >> The C++ ABI doesn't defer to the C psABI for types that aren't
> >> trivially-copyable. See
> >> http://mentorembedded.github.io/cxx-abi/abi.html#normal-call
> >
> > Hmm, yes, but we don't want to define something for only C and C++, but
> > language independend (so far as possible).  And given only the above
> > language I think this type:
> >
> > struct S {
> >   S() {something();}
> > };
> >
> > would be an empty type, and that's not what we want.
> 
> Yes it is. Did you mean to give S a copy constructor, copy assignment
> operator, or destructor instead?

Er, yes, I did mean to :-)


Ciao,
Michael.