On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 11:17:20PM -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: > In addition to a PR this is 1/2 of a C=+17 feature. (The other half - really > a separate thing - is attributes on namespaces).
Ah, nice, I wasn't aware. For the record, this is <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4266.html>. > I wonder if we should pedwarn for < C++17? > Or it could be just an extension for < C++17 - I guess that would match with > clang. Yeah, it is meant as a GNU extension. (clang supports this extension for several years already.) I'd rather let Jason decide what to do wrt C++17. > @@ -3651,11 +3651,6 @@ finish_id_expression (tree id_expression, > } > } > > - /* Handle references (c++/56130). */ > - tree t = REFERENCE_REF_P (decl) ? TREE_OPERAND (decl, 0) : decl; > - if (TREE_DEPRECATED (t)) > - warn_deprecated_use (t, NULL_TREE); > - > return decl; > } > > Why did this bit get removed? This hunk got added in r201906 to address c++/56130 - we didn't warn for deprecated references: int g_nn; int& g_n __attribute__((deprecated)) = g_nn; int main() { g_n = 1; } But then Jason added warn_deprecated_use to mark_used in r217677 and we warned twice. So I figured the warning in finish_id_expression isn't needed anymore. > Do we handle enums in template specializations? Not sure, could you provide a testcase? Thanks, Marek
