Does the following statement invoke undefined behavior?

[Graham]

hankdane: yes, but is that ctor anything more than a potentially time-consuming no-op?

filthy_mcnasty: I disagree - I'm struggling to come up with any sensible reason for doing that - even if you do fix the leak:

int main(void)
{
    int * p1 = new int(3);

    // this seems really perverse..
    int* p2 = p1;
    p1 = new int(*p1); // clone

    delete p2;
    return 0;
}

or, if a copy was really wanted, why not "int* p2 = new int(*p1)". It's just that every time I try to think of some reason for doing that, there's a less awkard way to do the same thing.

So I maintain that you can't ignore the leak, because I can't see any purpose to the statement other than to leak memory. If anyone can think of a valid purpose for that statement, please post it here.