C++ Logo

std-proposals

Advanced search

Re: [std-proposals] Standardising 0xdeadbeef for pointers

From: Sebastian Wittmeier <wittmeier_at_[hidden]>
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2025 04:18:15 +0200
That is, why it is important to keep the abstract machine in mind. It limits, what programmers can rely on. -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von:Frederick Virchanza Gotham via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> Gesendet:So 27.07.2025 02:49 Betreff:Re: [std-proposals] Standardising 0xdeadbeef for pointers An:std-proposals_at_[hidden]; CC:Frederick Virchanza Gotham <cauldwell.thomas_at_[hidden]>; On Sat, Jul 26, 2025 at 10:54 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > Any value written to a non-static data member by the destructor is a > dead store, it cannot be read after the destructor finishes. It is irrelevant > whether the object was initialized using placement new. > > As it's a dead store, the compiler can remove that store completely. Are you saying that the following program has undefined behaviour or that it's not guaranteed to print "deadbeef"? https://godbolt.org/z/6bcnz95Ed

Received on 2025-07-27 02:28:07