I once was involved in a dinner party where three different people dumped "a little bit" of salt into the soup while it was cooking.
This feels like that. I'll be taking care of this. > -----Original Message----- > From: James K. Lowden <jklow...@cobolworx.com> > Sent: Friday, June 6, 2025 14:51 > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] libgcobol: Drop unhelpful constexpr keyword > [PR120554] > > On Fri, 6 Jun 2025 15:48:27 +0200 > Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > In any case, the class doesn't have any constexpr constructors, so > > it isn't a literal type, one can't construct those objects in constant > > expressions and so using constexpr keyword for the defaulted copy > > assignment operator can't help because that needs to copy from a > > constant expression which isn't possible to construct. > > > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk? > > Yes please and thank you. > > I don't understand constexpr yet, why the programmer instead of the > compiler decides the question. But not valid is not valid. > > --jkl
