This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [C++ Patch/RFC] PR 56450


Hi,

On 04/28/2013 09:10 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 04/27/2013 05:17 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Assuming as obvious that we don't want to crash on it, the interesting
issue is whether we want the static_asserts to both fail or succeed: in
practice, a rather recent ICC I have at hand fails both; a rather recent
clang++ passes both (consistently with the expectation of Bug
submitter). In fact, as I'm reading now 7.1.6.2/4, since we are dealing
with a class member access in any case, it may well be possible that
*ICC* is right.

Yes, I think so. Since it's a class member access, decltype should be the declared type, i.e. const int.
Thanks. Is the below Ok, then? Tested (again) on x86_64-linux.

Thanks,
Paolo.

//////////////////////////

Attachment: CL_56450
Description: Text document

Attachment: patch_56450_2
Description: Text document


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]