https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105307
--- Comment #3 from Igel ---
well, quite surely,
> error: 'x' is not a member of 'NoX'
is not the only instance of this problem.
It seems to me that gcc is not differentiating "normal errors" from
"explanatory errors", and I guess introducing t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92440
Igel changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ich.freak at gmx dot net
--- Comment #5 from
: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ich.freak at gmx dot net
Target Milestone: ---
In #92440 (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92440) it was remarked
that -fmax-errors=1 truncates the first error "in the middle of the sentence"
and a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103540
--- Comment #2 from Igel ---
Ah thanks for copying the relevant code here. The error that you're referring
to is:
: In instantiation of 'struct X<0>':
:5:14: required by substitution of 'template requires
StrictNodeType using Int = int [wit
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ich.freak at gmx dot net
Target Milestone: ---
When a concept X is checked for a template parameter T, this parameter is fully
instanciated.
(while this may not be necessary to check the concept, this seems to be
dictated by the
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ich.freak at gmx dot net
Target Milestone: ---
When trying to resolve a function call, GCC iterates through the candidates,
checking if it can deduce/substitute template parameters. When failing to
deduce/substitute
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17314
Igel changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ich.freak at gmx dot net
--- Comment #21 from
