On 5/21/24 15:36, Patrick Palka wrote:
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look
OK for trunk?
Alternatively, I considered fixing this by incrementing
comparing_specializations around the call to comp_except_specs in
cp_check_qualified_type, but generally for types whose identity
depends on whether comparing_specializations is set we need to
use structural equality anyway IIUC.
Why not both?
+ bool complex_p = (cr && cr != noexcept_true_spec
+ && !UNPARSED_NOEXCEPT_SPEC_P (cr));
Why treat unparsed specs differently from parsed ones?
Jason
