On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 06/07/2011 06:19 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: >> >> I _think_ that you can unconditionally change the code to do >> >> TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t1) == TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t2) >> && TYPE_QUALS (t1) == TYPE_QUALS (t2) >> >> now, I'm not sure if for the testcase T and unsigned differ in qualifiers. >> Do they? > > Hmm, I think with the changes I made to the testcase they end up with the > same qualifiers. But for constexpr I need to handle them having different > qualifiers, too.
In that case you could do what Jakub suggested - but only for rvalues of course. I'm not sure if we already avoid calling the folding where we require lvalues. Can't you instead adjust the type you feed to fold_indirect_ref_1 in the caller in the C++ FE? Richard. > Jason >
