https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janschultke at googlemail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, my reduced testcase has slightly different behavior compared to the
original one for some versions of GCC. The original testcase is partly related
to PR 114844 while my reduced testcase is just missing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
C++14 (and C++11) had slightly different wording here:
```
Given a member function f of some class X, where f is an inheriting constructor
(12.9) or an implicitlydeclared special member function, the set of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
