http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59165
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59165
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Jan 3 11:11:31 2014
New Revision: 206313
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206313&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-01-03 Paolo Carlini
Core DR 1442
PR c++/5916
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59165
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59165
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59165
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think I remember the rationale now: std::begin and std::end only work if
c.begin() and c.end() xist, in which case range-based for will use those
members directly anyway.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59165
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to thakis from comment #0)
> This compiles, but shouldn't:
You add declarations to namespace std which is undefined behaviour, so any
result is valid.
The DR looks wrong to me, the point of treat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59165
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f