https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110348
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12) > BTW, shall size() and data() be manifestly constant-evaluated? > I think it doesn't satisfy any of the https://eel.is/c++draft/expr.const#19 > bullets (unlike first static_assert argument). Good point, I think we're missing some wording to make that all manifestly constant-evaluated; it absolutely should be. (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10) > Then it should be a warning rather than error IMHO. Because it isn't > invalid, just likely unintended. Agreed.
