guy-david wrote: > > @zygoloid Can you explain in your example why `a.n == 2` must be true, when > > your interpretation (which I understood in the same manner) of the > > standard's wording does indicate that the object's state is unspecified? > > My reading is that the standard says that the value of `a.n` after `*p = 1;` > is unspecified, but after `n = 2;` the value of `a.n` is 2.
I read it as "the value obtained" in the context of the execution of the entire constructor, because no value is really obtained after `*p = 1;`. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136792 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
