https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44313
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And for completeness, the docs have been updated:
Starting with GCC 4.3.0, GCC no longer gives an error for this case. This
change is based on the intent of the C++ language committee. As of 2010-05-28,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44313
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44313
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-24 21:56 ---
As far as I understand we decided that CD1 resolution Defect reports are going
to be implemented as part of C++03/C++98.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44313
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-24 21:57 ---
See PR 25950 which is the bug report which implemented that defect report. I
think we should just remove the paragraph from the web page or at least
reference we now implement that defect report.
--
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-24 22:02 ---
See also http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-10/msg01386.html:
When the rvalue references patch went in, DR391 was partially implemented, but
only for C++0x mode. This seems wrong to me; if the committee has
--- Comment #1 from ian at airs dot com 2010-05-28 14:30 ---
This was addressed as a DR by the C++ committee:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#391 . And of
course the proposed C++0x standard removes this error. So gcc should only give
an error with
