On 3/22/19 5:29 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 07:41:37PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/21/19 4:55 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 04:13:29PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/16/19 4:53 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
Here we have code like
struct X { oper
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 07:41:37PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/21/19 4:55 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 04:13:29PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 3/16/19 4:53 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > Here we have code like
> > > >
> > > > struct X { operator const i
On 3/21/19 4:55 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 04:13:29PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/16/19 4:53 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
Here we have code like
struct X { operator const int(); };
int&& rri = X();
which I think is invalid, because [dcl.init.ref] says that if ty
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 04:13:29PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/16/19 4:53 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Here we have code like
> >
> >struct X { operator const int(); };
> >int&& rri = X();
> >
> > which I think is invalid, because [dcl.init.ref] says that if types T1 and
> > T2
>
On 3/16/19 4:53 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
Here we have code like
struct X { operator const int(); };
int&& rri = X();
which I think is invalid, because [dcl.init.ref] says that if types T1 and T2
are reference-related, no qualifiers can be dropped, and if the reference is an
rvalue referen
Here we have code like
struct X { operator const int(); };
int&& rri = X();
which I think is invalid, because [dcl.init.ref] says that if types T1 and T2
are reference-related, no qualifiers can be dropped, and if the reference is an
rvalue reference, the initializer expression can't be an lv
