http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=11003
Douglas Gregor <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Douglas Gregor <[email protected]> 2011-10-04 19:18:50 CDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > Hmm... I think clang is messing up here: it's somehow picking the > Value(Value&&) constructor, but realizes it isn't viable when it actually > tries > to perform the conversion in question. Eli is correct. We shouldn't have allowed the binding to the rvalue reference in the first place. Fixed in Clang r141137. -- Configure bugmail: http://llvm.org/bugs/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ LLVMbugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmbugs
