https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118412
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > (In reply to André Brand from comment #3) > > That's interesting. > > This example is copied word for word from the standard section > > [temp.mem.enum](https://eel.is/c++draft/temp.mem.enum): > > https://godbolt.org/z/no6z7WT5s > > ... but all major compilers seem to reject it. > > https://eel.is/c++draft/temp.expl.spec#example-4 says it should be rejected. > > Looks like this should be fixed up again :). If you want you can submit something to the C++ standards committee because it does seems like there is a conflict between the 2 parts at least the example (the example might be considered an editorial change): https://isocpp.org/std/submit-issue
