https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104141
--- Comment #6 from Fedor Chelnokov ---
I agree that Clang behavior here might be wrong. Submitted
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/53334
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104141
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Fedor Chelnokov from comment #4)
> A::f() does not depend on template parameter, so the rules here are somewhat
> different than in T::f(). A possible answer:
> https://stackoverflow.com/a/70783
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104141
--- Comment #4 from Fedor Chelnokov ---
In
```
template concept t = requires{ A::f(); };
```
A::f() does not depend on template parameter, so the rules here are somewhat
different than in T::f(). A possible answer:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104141
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like clang does not always do access checking for static functions calls
inside requires. I know GCC has a bug there for dealing with caching in the
wrong context (I don't have the bug #).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104141
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note clang fails the static_assert with this one but that does not make sense
at all:
class A{
static void f();
};
template concept t = requires{ A::f(); };
static_assert( !t );
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104141
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Access to private member|nested requires statement
