David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes: > Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> writes: > >>> And answers are trickling in; see thread starting with >>> >>> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-users/2018-November/001417.html >> >> Is the work-around shown in >> >> https://godbolt.org/z/cTq06R >> >> usable for lilypond? > > No. It's not C++08 syntax, and LilyPond actually makes use of the > overloading resolution (which of the templates is called depends on > where in the hierarchy the function that the function pointer refers to > is defined) as part of the macro framework used here and thus it's not > possible to manually resolve the override and kill all the prospective > alternatives.
Besides, the way I read the "work-around" output, it still fails in Clang. > If the Clang developers refuse to fix the bug, we'll just stick with the > current scheme: we don't need Clang to compile the MacOSX version of > LilyPond. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
