This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/78890] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE on invalid reference type in union
- From: "rs2740 at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 10:16:02 +0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/78890] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE on invalid reference type in union
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-78890-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78890
--- Comment #7 from TC <rs2740 at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> Sure, I just wanted to understand why the r211318 change has been done and
> my comment lists why I think that happened.
Ah, my fault for not actually reading the patch. (FWIW, the sentence I quoted
was introduced by the same paper that relaxed the static data member
restrictions (N2544), so I'm not sure how that description makes sense, but
certainly it appears that r211318's author somehow thought so - possibly due to
paragraph numbering changes between C++03 and C++11?)