[Bug c++/13998] New: regression compared to gcc3.3, breaks boost::is_array

["john at johnmaddock dot co dot uk" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

Our test code for boost::is_array is currently broken on gcc3.4, but working 
on gcc3.3 as well as a variety of other compilers (VC7.1, Intel etc).

Test case follows,

Thanks,

John Maddock.

#include <cstddef>

namespace boost{

template <typename T>
struct is_array
{
    static const bool value = false;
};

template <typename T, std::size_t N>
struct is_array<T[N]>
{
    static const bool value = true;
};

template <typename T, std::size_t N>
struct is_array<const T[N]>
{
    static const bool value = true;
};

template <typename T, std::size_t N>
struct is_array<volatile T[N]>
{
    static const bool value = true;
};

template <typename T, std::size_t N>
struct is_array<const volatile T[N]>
{
    static const bool value = true;
};

template <typename T>
struct is_array<T[]>
{
    static const bool value = true;
};

template <typename T>
struct is_array<const T[]>
{
    static const bool value = true;
};

template <typename T>
struct is_array<volatile T[]>
{
    static const bool value = true;
};

template <typename T>
struct is_array<const volatile T[]>
{
    static const bool value = true;
};

}

struct test{};

typedef int sa1[ ::boost::is_array<int>::value == 0 ? 1 : -1];
typedef int sa2[ ::boost::is_array<test>::value == 0? 1 : -1];
typedef int sa1[ ::boost::is_array<int[2]>::value ? 1 : -1];
typedef int sa1[ ::boost::is_array<int[]>::value ? 1 : -1];
typedef int sa1[ ::boost::is_array<int const[2]>::value ? 1 : -1];
typedef int sa1[ ::boost::is_array<int volatile[]>::value ? 1 : -1];


int main()
{
   return 0;
}

-- 
           Summary: regression compared to gcc3.3, breaks boost::is_array
           Product: gcc
           Version: 3.4.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: c++
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: john at johnmaddock dot co dot uk
                CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13998