This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/21510] Possible bug
- From: "gdr at integrable-solutions dot net" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 16 May 2005 19:19:36 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/21510] Possible bug
- References: <20050511102800.21510.sven@clio.in-berlin.de>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-05-16 19:19 -------
Subject: Re: Possible bug
"sven at clio dot in-berlin dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
| (In reply to comment #7)
| > > Is there a way to distinguish between unions (which are not usable as base
| > > classes) and classes? If not, the standard is incomplete.
| >
| > You should know that 10 years ago people didn't even imagine the kind of
| > template usages that you are assuming as obvious. Indeed, everyone wants
| > to tell unions from classes now and you bet, it will be possible sometime
| > in the future, likely not using SFINAE at all.
|
| I know and accept this. SFINAE is a possible dangerous feature, anyway. It may
| be better if the ISO standard declares something like the following
| (incomplete, feel free to propose it to the standard comitee):
|
| The pragma statements
|
| _Pragme(set, "sfinae", on) // enables SFINAE
| _Pragma(set, "sfinae", off) // disables SFINAE
| _Pragma(reset, "sfinae") // sets SFINAE to the previous state
Over my dead body. :-)
-- Gaby
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21510