WU Yongwei wrote:
> Well, I see this in the gcc error message. Can someone here kindly
> point to me which part of the Standard specified this behaviour? I
> thought it should be in 5.3.4, but was not able to find the words
> there.
>
> By the way, anyone knows the rationale of this behaviour?
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> The issue was whether GNU g++ uses it as an *implementation detail*
> that will be affected if constructors suddenly became recursive.
I was not aware the proposal supported recursive constructors - in the
sense that the syntax I saw had no obvious way to terminate any
r
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> I know the proposals did not dig into all the corner cases -- and I
> don't even know whether they considered the case. But, at some point,
> someone has to go through the sheer number of proposals and try to
> paint a global picture and see how they interact with existi
