http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53036
Marc Glisse <marc.glisse at normalesup dot org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |marc.glisse at normalesup
| |dot org
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse <marc.glisse at normalesup dot org> 2012-04-19
06:28:57 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> In my understanding of the new C++ standard, the following code should
> compile.
> It does not.
>
> struct D
> {
> D() = default;
> D(D const &) = default;
> template<typename ...U>
> constexpr D(U ...u)
> {}
> };
> static_assert(std::is_trivial<D>::value, "here");
With the declarations in this order, it seems easy to fix, in
grok_special_member_properties, only set TYPE_HAS_COMPLEX_DFLT to 1 if we
didn't already have TYPE_HAS_DEFAULT_CONSTRUCTOR (might have hidden issues, but
they are not obvious to me).
Now if you put the defaulted constructor after the user-provided variadic one,
it becomes much harder, and it looks like we'd have to remember one extra bit
of information: the reason why we set TYPE_HAS_COMPLEX_DFLT.
