On 3/20/19 1:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:10:19AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
I was unclear. I was for the lazy creation of the hash. I just think it
can be lazily created at either the first or second explicit capture.
On top of the https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patc
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:10:19AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> I was unclear. I was for the lazy creation of the hash. I just think it
> can be lazily created at either the first or second explicit capture.
On top of the https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-03/msg00991.html
patch I've just
On 3/20/19 10:48 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 10:34:51AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 3/19/19 2:14 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
add_capture when parsing a lambda introducer uses the IDENTIFIER_MARKED
bit to detect duplicate captures.
I guess in strict C++11 that could have wo
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 10:34:51AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 3/19/19 2:14 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > add_capture when parsing a lambda introducer uses the IDENTIFIER_MARKED
> > bit to detect duplicate captures.
> > I guess in strict C++11 that could have worked, if the introducer could
>
On 3/19/19 2:14 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
add_capture when parsing a lambda introducer uses the IDENTIFIER_MARKED
bit to detect duplicate captures.
I guess in strict C++11 that could have worked, if the introducer could
contain just identifiers, but in C++14 it has 2 problems:
The followin
Hi!
add_capture when parsing a lambda introducer uses the IDENTIFIER_MARKED
bit to detect duplicate captures.
I guess in strict C++11 that could have worked, if the introducer could
contain just identifiers, but in C++14 it has 2 problems:
1) lambda initializers can contain arbitrary expressions
