On 12/19/2013 12:41 PM, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Thu, 19 Dec 2013, Henrik Mannerström wrote: > >> This question came up on SO ( >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7320520/optimizing-the-number-of-constructor-calls) >> >> and I was baffled since it went against the mantra "let the compiler do >> the copying". Do you have an idea of what is going on? Why is the >> commented version of operator+ worse? > > See: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57176 > Thank you! I was completely blinded by "pass by value" propaganda (http://cpp-next.com/archive/2009/08/want-speed-pass-by-value/). Now I won't be so naive.
