https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96877
--- Comment #6 from Ian Henriksen
---
Thanks, this makes sense. I originally got this idea from
https://stackoverflow.com/a/27489923. The discussion there implied there was
some kind of ambiguity in the standard and showed some examples where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96877
--- Comment #4 from Ian Henriksen
---
It's worth noting that, with g++
using function_type = void (*)(void*) noexcept;
actually works, but
typedef void(*function_type)(void*) noexcept;
does not. clang++ rejects both though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96877
--- Comment #3 from Ian Henriksen
---
The goal of doing it that way was get the exception specification onto the
pointer type in C++11 and C++14. The intent was to get the equivalent of
typedef void(*function_type)(void*) noexcept;
but with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96877
Ian Henriksen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: insertinterestingnamehere at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
When compiling the following with -Wextra (C++11 and later, all recent version
of gcc
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: insertinterestingnamehere at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
g++ 8.1 warns about unnecessary parentheses in some cases where they are
actually needed to designate something as a single argument to a macro. Here's
a minimal example
