https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116943
--- Comment #3 from mauro russo ---
may I suppose that the following text from [temp.inst]:
The implicit instantiation of a class template specialization causes
- the implicit instantiation of the declarations, but not of the definitions,
of th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116943
--- Comment #2 from mauro russo ---
thank you Andrew Pinski,
do you have also any explanation from the standard, why it should be rejected ?
That is, where the instantiation comes on ?
Or why this does not implicitly contradicts the option to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116943
Bug ID: 116943
Summary: wrong(?) indication of specialization after (implicit)
instantiation
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111608
mauro russo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ing.russomauro at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57376
mauro russo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ing.russomauro at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114694
Bug ID: 114694
Summary: dependent-name alias type accepted in elaborated type
specifier within a template
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114488
--- Comment #2 from mauro russo ---
If something is removed from sample code (e.g., b made bool instead of a
shared_ptr, or some const is removed), the problem disappears.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114488
Bug ID: 114488
Summary: internal compiler error: unexpected expression
static_cast ...
Product: gcc
Version: 9.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
