http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53573
--- Comment #23 from Keean Schupke <ke...@fry-it.com> 2012-06-27 06:48:28 UTC --- (In reply to comment #22) > (In reply to comment #21) > > Is there any chance this 'feature' of GCC could be kept as a g++ specific > > extension in 'gnu++11' mode, as I think the old behaviour is an improvement > > over that suggested in the standard, and GCC provides other extensions to > > standard behaviour where it is useful. > > I doubt it. The old behaviour was the source of several long-standing bug > reports. Now G++ implements the standard's required behaviour and agrees with > other leading compilers. GNU extensions usually allow new features by > supporting new syntax not by changing the meaning of valid code, it would not > be a pure extension. I have started a discussion on the C++ Standard discussion group about whether the code in the original example should work. So far the only responses have been to indicate that the code I posted is intended to work. Anyone wishing to discuss this further should post there: https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/msg/std-discussion/OABibx-FK-o/srhSRlQduJAJ
