Hi, thanks for your patch, and sorry it took me so long to respond.
On 08/18/2012 11:02 AM, Jiří Paleček wrote:
The idea of the fix is to postpone the decision whether or not to
capture later to the template instantiation. This is because until then,
we cannot know if the variable fulfills the c
On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 08/31/2012 09:17 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, would we not run the risk of doing the "wrong" capture if everything
>> is postponed?
>
>
> We wouldn't postpone name lookup, just the capture transformation.
>
> The long-term soluti
On 08/31/2012 09:17 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Hmm, would we not run the risk of doing the "wrong" capture if everything
is postponed?
We wouldn't postpone name lookup, just the capture transformation.
The long-term solution is to implement the rules properly, which depend
on how a variable
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Thanks for the patch!
>
>> The idea of the fix is to postpone the decision whether or not to capture
>> later to the template instantiation.
>
>
> That makes sense. We might as well postpone all default captures to
> instantiation time, sinc
Thanks for the patch!
The idea of the fix is to postpone the decision whether or not to capture
later to the template instantiation.
That makes sense. We might as well postpone all default captures to
instantiation time, since we need to postpone some of them.
+/* This is a hack
Let's CC Jason.
--- Begin Message ---
Hello,
I've been investigating a bug in gcc I came across recently and after some
difficulties, I have produced a patch that actually fixes that behavior.
However, I don't think the patch is very good and I would really
appreciate your help in making i
Hello,
I've been investigating a bug in gcc I came across recently and after some
difficulties, I have produced a patch that actually fixes that behavior.
However, I don't think the patch is very good and I would really
appreciate your help in making it better.
The problem is that when a
