rjmccall added a comment.

That doesn't seem like a good diagnostic.  The actual problem is that you can't 
copy-construct a W from a volatile W&, but the error is being reported at a 
lower level than overload resolution; and even if you accept that as given, 
it's still complaining about the qualifier mismatch as if that's more important 
that the fact that the types don't match up.

I think this is probably just not the right place to bail out of the loop.

Also, does the bug not reproduce if the S constructor's parameter isn't 
meaninglessly volatile-qualified?  It's possible that we're just not stripping 
that properly in some place.


http://reviews.llvm.org/D10881




_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to