https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52966
Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC| |msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The test case is valid because function two doesn't violate any of the
requirements on constexpr functions. In particular, there is no requirement
that a constexpr function definition must not refer to symbols or make calls to
functions that are not declared constexpr. Such a requirement only applies
when a constexpr function is invoked in a context where a /core constant
expression/ is required. An invocation of the constexpr function in such a
context is not a core constant expression.
