http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43947
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-30 15:41
---
> I am aware constexpr is not fully supported,
To be clear: officially, is not supported *at all*. If Jason told you that we
want to remember this specific detail in Bugzilla, fine, of course. You may
want to
--- Comment #3 from public at alisdairm dot net 2010-04-30 13:15 ---
Subject: Re: [C++0x] constexpr should allow declaration without a
definition
I am aware constexpr is not fully supported, and checked with Jason before
filing this issue.
We believe that constexpr should cur
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-30 12:57
---
Really, constexpr are *not* available yet, it seems definitely too early to
file PRs (in retrospect, I think we should not have committed those parser
bits, are causing a lot of counfusion :(
--
http://gcc
--- Comment #1 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-30 12:55 ---
I think "support" is putting it a bit strongly :)
There is some code in place to recognise the keyword, that's about it
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43947
