Hi, one of my users encountered a crash and I managed to size it down into a very small reproducable script:

class Foo
{
	Foo(){}
	Foo(Foo f){}
}
void Test(Foo f){}

void Main()
{
	auto f = Foo();
	Test(f);
}

Seems like it's due to the constructor passing by value. If I do “const Foo &in f” it doesn't crash.

I mean, this crashing makes a lot of sense if you think about it ? but perhaps it should throw a compiler error instead?

There are some issues with this. A few things are missing here, so it won't compile unless perhaps you're using a very forgiving compiler.

Having a copy-ctor taking the original object by value would invoke the copy-ctor recursively. Please don't do that.
A copy constructor takes a const reference.

When the little issues have been ironed out, you're left with a compiler error, as you would expect.
Gcc does this, and I would think other compilers would also do it. Have you tried a proper, clean build, and are both your header and implementation files saying the same thing?

You guys are aware that this is posted in AngelCode-forum, so its probably not C++ but AngelScript, right? :D

Juliean said:

You guys are aware that this is posted in AngelCode-forum, so its probably not C++ but AngelScript, right? :D

I wasn't. ?

I wish I could have caught that upon compile…

Haha thanks Juliean. This is indeed Angelscript. This seems to happen sometimes when I post Angelscript bugs that could be interpreted also as C++ questions. ? Sorry for any confusion!