http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55542
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-11-30
08:41:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 28834
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28834
gcc48-pr55542.patch
I'd say that because the parameter pack is unnamed, it is fine to keep the
individual parameters in it unnamed too, and the other
make_ith_pack_parameter_name invocation was already guarding it.
Instead of handling NULL in the caller in the other spot, I think it is cleaner
just to return NULL from make_ith_pack_parameter_name.
