On Feb 1, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Nick Lewycky <[email protected]> wrote: >> Author: nicholas >> Date: Fri Feb 1 18:25:55 2013 >> New Revision: 174242 >> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=174242&view=rev >> Log: >> This patch makes "&Cls::purevfn" not an odr use. This isn't what the standard >> says, but that's a defect (to be filed). "Cls::purevfn()" is still an odr >> use.
Why is this specific to *pure* virtual functions? Shouldn't it be *any* virtual function? I mean, non-pure virtual functions are universally ODR-used anyway, but there's no plausible implementation model in which &Cls::vfn specifically requires a reference to the function. John. _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
