From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-113074-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 5001 invoked by alias); 4 Oct 2004 17:37:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 4949 invoked by uid 48); 4 Oct 2004 17:37:05 -0000
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 17:37:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20041004173705.4948.qmail@sourceware.org>
From: "reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
In-Reply-To: <20041003111503.17805.rth@gcc.gnu.org>
References: <20041003111503.17805.rth@gcc.gnu.org>
Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/17805] too liberal operator lookup
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00461.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>


------- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-10-04 17:37 -------
Here's a reduced version:

=======================================
struct A
{
    A(int);
    A(const char*);
};

bool operator==(const A&, const A&);

enum E { e };

bool b = (e == "");
=======================================

Btw, icc rejects it.


-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17805