https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56958
serpent7776 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||serpent7776 at gmail dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56958
James Y Knight changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||foom at fuhm dot net
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56958
Will Benfold changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||will at benfold dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56958
Louis Dionne ldionne.2 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ldionne.2 at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56958
--- Comment #3 from lucdanton at free dot fr 2013-04-28 00:37:37 UTC ---
I do make use of the variable in the pack; that the pack may be empty for some
instantiations may or may not be something to look out for, but I don't think
that it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56958
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
14:23:27 UTC ---
Well, you aren't using spurious, are you? Because t + spurious... expands to
nothing.
If mark_exp_read isn't called while processing_template_decl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56958
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-04-26
14:30:29 UTC ---
I agree, looks like warning is fine...
