http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
--- Comment #11 from Daniel Krügler
2011-04-18 11:47:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> It is not accepted.
>
> I tried again to remove the special code for is_default_constructible in
> and a number of static_asserts, all having to do with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini 2011-04-18
11:33:34 UTC ---
It is not accepted.
I tried again to remove the special code for is_default_constructible in
and a number of static_asserts, all having to do with arrays
fired...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
--- Comment #9 from Daniel Krügler
2011-04-18 11:12:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Thanks. But I'm confused by what is replacing the hard-error. Isn't this
> supposed to be well-formed?
>
> template class = decltype(T())
> >
> char f(in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill 2011-04-18
00:50:37 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Apr 18 00:50:31 2011
New Revision: 172632
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172632
Log:
PR c++/48531
* typeck2.c (build_functional_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Krügler
2011-04-14 23:00:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Here is a minimalistic example that provokes the same error. The essence is,
that the construction expression is evaluated combined with another
construction
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2011-04-14
17:55:43 UTC ---
Thanks Jason. Now Daniel we have to figure out which other bug (ie, possibly
prepare a reduced testcase for Jason) prevents us from getting rid completely
of the special casing for def
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48531
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill 2011-04-14
15:00:18 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 14 15:00:15 2011
New Revision: 172434
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172434
Log:
PR c++/48531
* init.c (build_value_init_noc
12 matches
Mail list logo
