[Bug c++/31652] postfix increment semantics implemented incorrectly

[drow at false dot org]

------- Comment #8 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-04-22 18:49 -------
Subject: Re:  postfix increment semantics implemented
        incorrectly

On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 05:18:09PM -0000, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> 13.5.1/1 explains that:
> @x is the same as operator@(x) or x.operator@() [depending on if x has a member
> function for operator@ or not] .

Sorry; I checked with Mark and this is indeed the relevant paragraph.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31652