why constructors not called [duplicate]

This question already has an answer here:

• What are copy elision and return value optimization? 4 answers

I wrote a simple test program to understand move semantics and return value optimization. I tested the following program in my local machine (4.4.0 linux kernel, 5.4.0 g++), with --std=c++14 flag.

g++ --std=c++14 main.cpp

The program:

#include <iostream>

using namespace std;

class Component {
    public:
        Component();

        Component(Component& _c);
        Component& operator=(Component& _c);

        Component(Component&& _c);
        Component& operator=(Component&& _c);

        virtual ~Component() = default;

};

Component::Component() {
    cout << "default constructor" << endl;
}

Component::Component(Component& _c) {
    cout << "copy constructor" << endl;
}

Component& Component::operator=(Component& _c) {
    cout << "copy assignment" << endl;
    return *this;
}

Component::Component(Component&& _c) {
    cout << "move constructor" << endl;
}

Component& Component::operator=(Component&& _c) {
    cout << "move assignment" << endl;
    return *this;
}

auto maker() {
    Component c;
    return c;
}

auto move_maker() {
    Component c;
    return std::move(c);
}

int main() {
    auto c1 = maker();
    auto c2 = move_maker();
    return 0;
}

The program outputs:

default constructor
default constructor
move constructor

I understand that the second "default constructor" comes from initializing Component inside move_maker(), and the "move constructor" comes from the main function where c2 is initialized (initialized with rvalue reference). What I don't understand is why maker() along with initializing c1 outputs only "default constructor". For

Component c1 = maker();

What's going on there? Why constructor is not called? Does it have anything to do with small value optimization?