https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105174
Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2022-04-06
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC| |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed. P2113 was implemented in GCC 11 by commit r11-1571-g57b4daf8dc4ed7,
which says:
commit 57b4daf8dc4ed7b669cc70638866ddb00f5b7746
Date: Thu Jun 11 23:58:54 2020 -0400
c++: Refinements to "more constrained".
P2113 from the last C++ meeting clarified that we only compare constraints
on functions or function templates that have equivalent template parameters
and function parameters.
I'm not currently implementing the complicated handling of reversed
comparison operators here; thinking about it now, it seems like a lot of
complexity to support a very weird usage. If I write two similar
comparison
operators to be distinguished by their constraints, why would I write one
reversed? If they're two unrelated operators, they're very unlikely to be
similar enough for the complexity to help. I've started a discussion on
the
committee reflector about changing these rules.
