On 9/20/07, Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > Yes it is intentional. It is an extension of an already existing
> > error with non templates. The code is invalid, though the C++
> > standard does make a mention, this does not have to be diagnostic.
>
>
Andrew Pinski wrote:
> Yes it is intentional. It is an extension of an already existing
> error with non templates. The code is invalid, though the C++
> standard does make a mention, this does not have to be diagnostic.
Thanks for the quick reply! This is great, I like the change since it
enfor
On 9/20/07, Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Compilation works with *many* other compilers incl. all older, released g++,
> Visual C++, and EDG-based compilers.
And that does not make the code valid.
> I spent some time with Google and also looked here:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/g
