Hi,
On 09/02/2014 05:45 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 09/02/2014 11:07 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Anyway, what about the below? Certainly works for the tests which we
have got.
Hmm. This is definitely an improvement, as it allows a subset of
a non-volatile glvalue of literal type that refers
On 09/03/2014 06:53 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
The issue, AFAICS, boils down to the difference itself between
cxx_eval_outermost_constant_expr and cxx_eval_constant_expression:
changing constant_value_1 means that in principle all the calls of the
latter (for VAR_DECLs) are impacted.
Oh, right.
Hi,
On 09/02/2014 04:11 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 09/01/2014 09:47 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
-constexpr A b = a;// { dg-error mutable }
+constexpr A b = a;
This is wrong; we still need to get an error here.
Hum, interesting. Neither current EDG nor current clang error out there.
On 09/01/2014 09:47 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
-constexpr A b = a; // { dg-error mutable }
+constexpr A b = a;
This is wrong; we still need to get an error here.
Jason
On 09/02/2014 10:17 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Let's see if I can tease the case out...
I think you need to leave that hunk alone, and instead fix the new
testcase by treating = {} more like {}, just as we already don't require
a copy constructor call for copy-list-initialization.
Jason
Hi,
On 09/02/2014 04:28 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 09/02/2014 10:17 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Let's see if I can tease the case out...
I think you need to leave that hunk alone, and instead fix the new
testcase by treating = {} more like {}, just as we already don't
require a copy
Hi again,
On 09/02/2014 04:28 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 09/02/2014 10:17 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Let's see if I can tease the case out...
I think you need to leave that hunk alone, and instead fix the new
testcase by treating = {} more like {}, just as we already don't
require a copy
On 09/02/2014 11:07 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Anyway, what about the below? Certainly works for the tests which we
have got.
Hmm. This is definitely an improvement, as it allows a subset of
a non-volatile glvalue of literal type that refers to a non-volatile
object whose lifetime began
Hi,
I think that in order to implement the resolution we simply have to
remove the check. Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
/cp
2014-09-01 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com
DR 1405
PR c++/58102
* semantics.c
