https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104712
ajrh at ajrh dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ajrh at ajrh dot net
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104712
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104712
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The in-class declaration is the definition if it's inline and has an
initializer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104712
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to ajrh from comment #2)
> Oh drat, reduced test cases are maddening... it's an inline static const
> in my original. I'll try to reduce something again.
I think even with inline static
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104712
--- Comment #2 from ajrh at ajrh dot net ---
Oh drat, reduced test cases are maddening... it's an inline static const in
my original. I'll try to reduce something again.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104712
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
