http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53025
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> --- This is just a polite reminder for some response. I'm especially interested to hear whether there exist any reasonable doubts on the validity of the arguments brought forward. IMO it is important to fix at, because otherwise it does have the potential to subtly change overload selection (if noexcept is used as part of sfinae) and other static introspection tests. I'd like to add that a related CWG issue http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#1356 was submitted for another situation where it was considered important that exception-specification is "stable" regardless of an actual call. The new wording suggested as of http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#1351 seems clear to me to have the effect of including functions even if they are copy-elided.
