https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90858
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90858
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Not quite sure if that is a backportable change. Maybe if we knew what exactly
in that commit made the difference.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90858
--- Comment #5 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
Nice! Do you plan on backporting the fix to active branches? (all gcc versions
since 4.7 are affected)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90858
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90858
--- Comment #3 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
Ping?
As reporter can I do anything more to move this bug forward?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90858
--- Comment #2 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
This bug exists since the beginning of C++11 constexpr support (gcc 4.7).
Here is a reproducer for C++11:
struct Base
{
int a;
template
static constexpr int for_all_data_members(F&&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90858
--- Comment #1 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
Here is another repoducer, that does not use std::variant:
#include
#include
#include
struct Base
{
int a;
template
static constexpr auto for_all_data_members(F&& func)
{
