On 02/27/2018 03:29 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 02/27/2018 01:51 PM, Håkon Sandsmark wrote:
Thanks for the feedback. I chose to take the example from the bug
report verbatim as the test case.
However, I agree it makes sense to have the simplest possible test
case that reproduces the issue. Here is an updated patch.
Thanks!
+ /* If there is any qualification still in effect, clear it
+ * now; we will be starting fresh with the next capture. */
For future reference, we don't add * at the beginning of subsequent
lines in a comment. I'll correct that in this patch and check it in.
Done. FYI I also renamed the testcase to lambda-init17.C; I sometimes
like to run e.g. the *lambda* tests as a smoke test, and "pr12345" isn't
very useful for that.
Jason
