These bugs are considered duplicate cases of PR51851 which has been suspended
since 2012, an issue known as "core1001/1322". Considering this background,
it deserves a long comment to explain.
Many people believed the root cause of this family of bugs is related with
the nature of how and when
I already responded to this patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-September/579527.html
d of bugs. It happens
during template function declaration stage #1 when producing template
declarator. Instead of doing a later-correction-effort in PR92010, my patch
tries to at least avoid dropping "const" in case of "typename" and "decltype"
during template f
>>template
>>struct A
>>{
>> void f(T);
>>};
>>
>>template
>>void A::f(const T)
>>{ }
>>
>>which is certainly questionable code, but is currently also accepted by
>>clang and EDG compilers.
I just found out that clang actually correctly reject this code during
specialization.
(https://www.g
On 9/25/21 15:15, nick huang wrote:
Why doesn't the PR92010 fix address these testcases as well?
3. PR92010 creates new functions of "rebuild_function_or_method_type" and by
using gdb to trace PR101402 code as following:
template struct A {
typedef T arr[3];
};
template void f(const typ
