http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51609
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51609
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-18
14:47:50 UTC ---
I'll look into this today...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51609
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-19
02:24:24 UTC ---
While I agree the code is reasonable, I think an LWG issue is needed, because I
don't think GCC's behaviour is in conflict with the standard.
I don't read
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51609
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2011-12-19 07:07:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
While I agree the code is reasonable, I think an LWG issue is needed, because
I
don't think GCC's behaviour is in
