https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88572
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Will Wray from comment #7) > So, as to whether it should be a warning; I think not, but... > for practical portability reasons, it probably should be left as a warning > at least until some epoch like C++2a where both GCC & Clang could remove > the warning under the -std=c++2a flag. Make sense? No, I don't think so. I don't see why the warning should be given for C++11 but not C++2a when the code is valid for both. I think it should be accepted without a warning. I'd be more inclined to say it should be accepted in C++98 with a -pedantic warning, rather than give a warning for C++11. > I wonder if the extra braces should have additional benefits like not > allowing > narrowing conversions. My limited experiments (on Clang) show no difference. The outermost braces already mean it's a context that doesn't allow narrowing, so the additional inner braces make no difference.
