On 12/2/21 10:27, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 11:24:58PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 12/1/21 10:16, Marek Polacek wrote:
In C++23, auto(x) is valid, so decltype(auto(x)) should also be valid,
so
void f(decltype(auto(0)));
should be just as
void f(int);
but
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 11:24:58PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/1/21 10:16, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > In C++23, auto(x) is valid, so decltype(auto(x)) should also be valid,
> > so
> >
> >void f(decltype(auto(0)));
> >
> > should be just as
> >
> >void f(int);
> >
> > but
On 12/1/21 10:16, Marek Polacek wrote:
In C++23, auto(x) is valid, so decltype(auto(x)) should also be valid,
so
void f(decltype(auto(0)));
should be just as
void f(int);
but currently, everytime we see 'auto' in a parameter-declaration-clause,
we try to
In C++23, auto(x) is valid, so decltype(auto(x)) should also be valid,
so
void f(decltype(auto(0)));
should be just as
void f(int);
but currently, everytime we see 'auto' in a parameter-declaration-clause,
we try to synthesize_implicit_template_parm for it, creating a new template
