http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48323
--- Comment #4 from Jan van Dijk <j.v.dijk at tue dot nl> 2011-03-28 22:17:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) Sorry for being pedantic, but would you care to explain how your observation renders this report invalid? I am afraid I do not understand this resolution. Do you assert that the two cases (static local in global vs. class scope function) are deliberately treated differently? If so, is this an implementation choice, or is it based on a document that I should have read (which one)? If this isn't changed back, shouldn't this change at least be documented? It may break more user code, not just mine... Thanks again for your time.
