------- Comment #8 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 18:49 ------- Subject: Re: postfix increment semantics implemented incorrectly
On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 05:18:09PM -0000, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > 13.5.1/1 explains that: > @x is the same as operator@(x) or x.operator@() [depending on if x has a > member > function for operator@ or not] . Sorry; I checked with Mark and this is indeed the relevant paragraph. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31652