http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32402
--- Comment #12 from William Waisse <gcc at waisse dot org> 2010-10-31 11:59:13 UTC --- I m no more working for the company that was trying to port this code to linux/GCC 3 YEARS AGO . They finally abandonned the idea to get their professional application working on GCC/Linux. I m sure this IS a bug , and I cant understand why this (documented) bug is still new 3 years later. I m not sure this is ok with C++ grammar or semantic ( but I think it is ), I m just sure this is a good thing to give microsoft and concurrent compilers more customers who will not have the choice to move to linux/gcc. Even if its not a bug, gcc should provide an "official" workaround and argue on WHY this is not possible in gcc, while available without any problem with most other compilers . Thanks Jonathan Wakely ( comment #9 ) , posting a workaround IS relevant, and useful for the next one hitting this bug.
