https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97154
Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yes, it's valid. spec.back() is specified as equivalent to
spec.operator[](spec.size() - 1). libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_vector.h
implements back() as:
/**
* Returns a read/write reference to the data at the last
* element of the %vector.
*/
reference
back() _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT
{
__glibcxx_requires_nonempty();
return *(end() - 1);
}
spec.back() is shorter and arguably clearer so if someone would like to change
the code I'd support it.
