On 12/13/2011 02:03 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 12/13/2011 12:43 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
+ if (TREE_CODE (expr) == PTRMEM_CST)
+ /* We don't need to test if a PTRMEM_CST is a constant value
+ because maybe_constant_value might crash and because
+ [temp.arg.nontype]/1 says it's not allowed as a template
+ argument anyway. */;
A PTRMEM_CST is already constant, and a valid template argument for a
parameter of pointer to member type, we just want to leave it in that
form rather than lower it to a CONSTRUCTOR.
But yes, the patch is OK after fixing the comment.
Jason
