ot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: richard-gccbugzilla at metafoo dot co dot uk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40925
--- Comment #1 from richard-gccbugzilla at metafoo dot co dot uk
2009-07-31 15:26 ---
Working draft N2914, 20.3.3 says:
template
struct pair {
[...]
requires CopyConstructible && CopyConstructible pair(const T1 &x,
const T2 &y);
... and this is (modulo con
--- Comment #2 from richard-gccbugzilla at metafoo dot co dot uk
2007-06-05 17:21 ---
Points worthy of note:
1) The OP's code is legal (to my reading of the standard) but meaningless.
Private members in unnamed classes are legal, while private members in
anonymous unions are no
--- Comment #2 from richard-gccbugzilla at metafoo dot co dot uk
2007-06-11 18:11 ---
Dup of 7046.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21560
ssigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: richard-gccbugzilla at metafoo dot co dot uk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36486
--- Comment #1 from richard-gccbugzilla at metafoo dot co dot uk
2008-06-10 14:51 ---
FWIW, Microsoft's recent compilers agree that this is ill-formed also.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36486
--- Comment #3 from richard-gccbugzilla at metafoo dot co dot uk
2008-06-11 12:58 ---
I'm not 100% certain that g++ is at fault. Given that icc, Comeau and MS all
reject it, I'm inclined to think that g++ is probably the one which gets this
wrong, so I've raised this he
