https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38431
Richard Smith <richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #1 from Richard Smith <richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk> ---
(In reply to tonyelewis from comment #0)
> I'm guessing that this
> code is valid because f() and A can be reasonably instantiated with an empty
> parameter pack
Your guess turns out to be incorrect. See http://eel.is/c++draft/temp#res-8.3:
"The program is ill-formed, no diagnostic required, if [...] every valid
specialization of a variadic template requires an empty template parameter
pack"
So Clang is correct to diagnose this. (And the other compilers are correct to
accept it if they so choose.)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug._______________________________________________
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
