From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 33F4D3858CDB; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 10:20:05 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 33F4D3858CDB DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1677579605; bh=vXtOqfy/VAVEsyEXLN4aiM8Zx1LbyrlAz0tFCmNrrXQ=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=nq8Ih2u7jX4aUSv2LofgQmdBPvFCsnH78YckrAPuOznUeYv0Ygq8NghRKwAmRY5pk DKHtYUUOHoS7jTDEJt4eks9WxLq1y/dn/eENWMVU+JCDhee/eAlIWOPCYUfPqhAfoy 4RETC0aZbxBInU2HHEsvWeOoiEa1qWS4wAa128l0= From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/108965] g++: unable to parse c11 _Generics Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2023 10:20:04 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.3.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D108965 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Christopher Friedt from comment #0) > It's not clear to me if any part of the ISO C++ standard requires a C++ > compiler to parse C11 _Generic, It's very clear that it doesn't, _Generic is never mentioned anywhere in the C++ standard. > but it certainly can make life less > pleasant, as the equivalent C++ code can sometimes rely on static inline > constexpr templates which are apparently "not cool" until C++14. This Why not? What exactly is the equivalent code you're referring to? C++ has never needed _Generic because it supports function overloading.=