--- Comment #7 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-09 21:39 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42370 ***
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-01-14 10:21
---
Obviously it shouldn't ICE, but I don't think this code is valid: the type of a
lambda expression is a class type not a function pointer, and I don't think
it's convertible to a function pointer.
--
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-14 11:13
---
Does it matter that lambdas with no-capture are special, per n2989? (also see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg01690.html)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42737
--- Comment #6 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-01-14 12:30
---
(In reply to comment #5)
Does it matter that lambdas with no-capture are special, per n2989? (also see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg01690.html)
ah yes, that would make it valid! I wasn't
--- Comment #1 from vimal78 at gmail dot com 2010-01-13 22:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=19586)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19586action=view)
c++ source file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42737
--- Comment #2 from vimal78 at gmail dot com 2010-01-13 22:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=19587)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19587action=view)
generated file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42737
--- Comment #3 from vimal78 at gmail dot com 2010-01-13 22:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=19588)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19588action=view)
generated file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42737
