[Bug c++/10940] [3.3/3.4 regression] Bad code with explicit specialization

[bangerth@dealii.org]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10940


bangerth@dealii.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P1
            Summary|Explicit Template           |[3.3/3.4 regression] Bad
                   |Specialization of Static    |code with explicit
                   |Member  Function Generates  |specialization
                   |Bad Code                    |


------- Additional Comments From bangerth@dealii.org  2003-05-22 18:38 -------
Forgot to say this: with 2.95, the parser has a problem with understanding
the explicit specialization. Making it a general template, the code doesn't
crash. So I'd say it's a regression, though it's hard to judge here.

(Then let's say that an invalid error message is less bad than a miscompilation,
and then it's a regression :-)

W.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.