https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109991
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109991
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109991
--- Comment #3 from igk ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Dup of bug 98675.
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 98675 ***
Thanks for looking into this. I haven't quite understood though.
I'm trying to see i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109991
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to igk from comment #3)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> > Dup of bug 98675.
> >
> > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 98675 ***
>
> Thanks for looking into this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109991
--- Comment #5 from igk ---
OK, becoming clearer, thanks. I'm just hoping for this to be diagnosed in some
way. IIUC basically GCC doesn't diagnose the UB so it proceeds with constexpr
eval just because it can, or so it thinks, and in the proces
