https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61660
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Udo Steinberg from comment #5)
> Yes, I'm saying a similar warning should be emitted for x.
No it should not, you are using x and s in completely different ways.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61660
--- Comment #5 from Udo Steinberg ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> That is still correct s is not a constant expression.
Yes, I'm saying a similar warning should be emitted for x.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61660
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Udo Steinberg from comment #3)
> Created attachment 33035 [details]
> Testcase 2
>
> Then, similar to this new test case, I would expect something like the
> following:
>
> g++ -std=gnu++11 foo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61660
--- Comment #3 from Udo Steinberg ---
Created attachment 33035
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33035&action=edit
Testcase 2
Then, similar to this new test case, I would expect something like the
following:
g++ -std=gnu++11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61660
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61660
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That's not how static_assert works.
