On 10/23/2012 07:55 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
OK.
Unfortunately the patch as-is seems at least incomplete, thus to be sure
I reverted it for now and re-opened the PR: trying to actually use the
type showed issues in the gimplifier, see below. If you have hints about
that I would be glad to furt
OK.
Jason
Hi,
today I spent quite a bit of time on this reject legal issue filed by
Daniel, having to do with constrexpr constructors and anonymous union
members: I didn't want to make the loop much more complex but we have to
handle correctly multiple anonymous union too and of course produce
correct
