https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Keyw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2022-08-19 00:0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
--- Comment #6 from Janez Zemva ---
I have since changed the repo. You can still demonstrate the bug by
uncommenting the line:
//[&a, &r, &s]() noexcept -> bool // uncomment for bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
--- Comment #5 from Janez Zemva ---
The workaround is very simple, just put "[&]() noexcept -> bool" into sq2.hpp.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
--- Comment #4 from Janez Zemva ---
Created attachment 53482
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53482&action=edit
preprocessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
--- Comment #3 from Janez Zemva ---
BTW: I already tried to make a minimal test case, but failed, all compiled
fine. Maybe tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
--- Comment #2 from Janez Zemva ---
Sorry, I can't, because I already changed the code a little and I'm keeping the
repo such as it is so as to not invalidate this bug report. Why not clone the
repo and do what you need to do? I'm keeping it in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-08-19
Ever confirmed|0
10 matches
Mail list logo
