This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/34774] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] templates, enumerations, overflow, ice
- From: "tbptbp at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 14 Jan 2008 12:47:26 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/34774] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] templates, enumerations, overflow, ice
- References: <bug-34774-9709@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #12 from tbptbp at gmail dot com 2008-01-14 12:47 -------
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] templates, enumerations, overflow, ice
On 14 Jan 2008 12:35:51 -0000, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
<gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> The testcase in comment #3 looks valid(?), at least EDG accepts it. The
> problem is we try to fold_non_dependent_expr
>
> n = n0 > max_shift ? max_shift : n0,
>
> but substituting n0 makes this expression dependent and we leak template
> param lists to fold.
I'm no language lawyer, but the whole exercise is supposed to be
valid. It has been mutilated for msvc2k5, and it works there. It also
works with g++ when it doesn't fault (that is when i use an
alternative implementation). Icc 10.1 doesn't complain either before
crashing ;)
So, to me, with my rosy teinted glasses strapped on, it has never been
an ice-on-invalid.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34774