aaron.ballman added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39284#906889, @lichray wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39284#906860, @aaron.ballman wrote: > > > I'm aware, but I was unaware that we've accepted this functionality in > > C++2a yet within WG21. Did we vote this in and I simply didn't remember it? > > > No. In the first line of the Summary I said this hasn't even been proposed. > But on the reflectors it received positive feedback. While I was trying to > implement it in order to find out corner cases which I haven't thought of, I > found that the implementation is astonishingly simple, defending the change > by showing that not introducing the change to the language is merely > complicating the language, so I decided to seeking for a possibility to land > it first. Okay, then I didn't misunderstand you and we're on the same page. We typically diagnose vendor extensions to the language, and I think we should apply that consistently. Otherwise, your code will compile fine in Clang with warning levels cranked all the way up and then fail to compile on every other compiler, which does not do our users any good. I'll let Richard have the final say for this, but my preference is that this is diagnosed as an extension (at least in pedantic mode). https://reviews.llvm.org/D39284 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
