On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > I don't fully understand the patch, but it's OK for trunk, and if > you're confident it's definitely correct and safe it's OK for the > gcc-5 and gcc-4_9 branches too. > > Was it just completely wrong before, creating a vector of > default-constructed match results, that were not matched? >
Yes, that's the case. I'm not sure why I missed this. Perhaps all I was focusing on is to get the captures in the lookahead sub-expression out of it, so later user can use it; but I didn't think about the other way around. -- Regards, Tim Shen
