https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
But note that the existing "mostly works" behaviour doesn't help solve the
general problem, it would need entirely new code in the front end to be written
from scratch for this specific call.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It _could_ be, see jakub's description in the dup of how it could be done
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
--- Comment #9 from Barry Revzin ---
> I think it was never intentionally supported in constexpr (it just happened
> to work) and so such code was never correct.
Can it just be made to work in constexpr? Is there a reason not to? It already
mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Barry Revzin from comment #3)
> At this point lots of code relies on that working.
I think it was never intentionally supported in constexpr (it just happened to
work) and so such code was ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> Dup.
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 106889 ***
I should say bug 106889 is exactly the same as this one and yes it is
__builtin_strlen a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 61155
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61155&action=edit
Reduced testcase without templates
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
And yes it is due to __builtin_strlen in some cases.
