http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53000
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse <marc.glisse at normalesup dot org> 2012-04-24 22:35:31 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > it's not obvious to me what the right fix is > either so I'm not in a rush to change anything. Actually, I now believe it is a good idea to rush (well, maybe not quite) the change: - it is needed by clang, - it gives users an opportunity to complain against the proposed resolution (if they don't, it is an argument in favor of it), - it removes an excuse not to fix ?: with xvalues. I think I've canceled my comment #3 enough that we are back to your comment #2 where you were proposing to make the change ;-)
