From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id D49403858D35; Sat, 6 May 2023 22:02:01 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D49403858D35 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1683410521; bh=0qjKLFPtuS/YcfcuKyQ2c8uvKRCEouw31jkVce7Dd3Y=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=GX0UQQXACfgoojvNvIWeqw3ongCO474zXcGKPOyTbmZJPSZ2LU1/OoLQqg4TtsOPS l8DKpEmq0VBHtaUG0wbOPosdHDI9CAQZ07aWj25kOigN64RPisQix4xYYcVzd4+2RP nhKH9VVs0DHn7+kuWB/ekK7LI2MENOIe5T72gogI= From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/109751] boost iterator_interface fails concept check starting in gcc-13 Date: Sat, 06 May 2023 22:02:01 +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: unknown 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=3D109751 --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely --- Yes, I think GCC 13 is correct to reject it (but not correct to ICE!) Either way, I don't see how it can be a libstdc++ bug, the concept is defin= ed the same way, it's the compiler that diagnoses the bug. So I agree with Andrew's change to component=3Dc++ as well.=