Tested with DMD 2.091.0: ``` struct Blitter { int payload; this(this){} } struct Adder { Blitter blitter; this(int payload){this.blitter.payload = payload;} this(ref Adder rhs){this.blitter.payload = rhs.blitter.payload + 1;} } void main() { import std.stdio; Adder piece1 = 1; auto piece2 = piece1; version (Excepted) assert (piece2.blitter.payload == 2); else assert (piece2.blitter.payload == 1); } ```
*** Issue 20940 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
@RazvanN7 created dlang/dmd pull request #11945 "Fix Issues 20714, 20965 - Postblit has priority over copy constructor" fixing this issue: - Fix Issues 20714, 20965 - Postblit has priority over copy constructor https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/11945
dlang/dmd pull request #11945 "Fix Issues 20714, 20965 - Postblit has priority over copy constructor" was merged into master: - 40d0661190ac132dbb5d61e3804dd22bbea26602 by RazvanN7: Fix Issues 20714, 20965 - Postblit has priority over copy constructor https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/11945
dlang/dmd pull request #11947 "Revert PR 11945 (Postblit has priority over copy constructor)" was merged into master: - bc6976a4cc7abe799856689c077406a269dc0c51 by Geod24: Revert "Fix Issues 20714, 20965 - Postblit has priority over copy constructor" This reverts commit c35ace622492da4ca53c055c9af0fa0346aa178b. PR 11945 / this commit introduces a silent change of behavior, which leads to fields with postblit not having their postblit called anymore. A deprecation path was proposed, and would require the user to disable postblit when a copy constructor is present, or issue a deprecation message otherwise. Other options are likely available to avoid a silent behavior change. However, since the PR was merged within 4 minutes of being submitted, there were no time for such suggestions. Additionally, the PR was lacking both a spec PR and a changelog entry. https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/11947