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++ RFC / Patch] PR 54080, PR 52875 and more (aka SFINAE vs template recursion depth)


On 08/08/2013 03:54 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
the really interesting one is decltype28.C, which we don't reject
anymore, we simply accept it. What is happening is that the overload
which leads to excessive template instantiation depth is SFINAE-ed away
and the other one "wins"! Thus, this is the core of my message: it seems
that we behave wrt this issue - SFINAE vs template instantiation depth -
in a different way vs current clang++ and icc: we produce hard error
messages in SFINAE contexts. Is that intended?

Yes, that is intended. Changing that could mean that the meaning of code depends on what max depth the user selected.

Jason


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