From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27049 invoked by alias); 12 Mar 2011 13:11:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 26946 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Mar 2011 13:11:26 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:11:21 +0000 From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/48089] [C++0x] ICE on in(?)valid in constexpr constructors X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Status Last reconfirmed Version Summary Ever Confirmed Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:11:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-03/txt/msg01246.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48089 Jonathan Wakely changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2011.03.12 13:11:18 Version|unknown |4.6.0 Summary|ICE on in(?)valid in |[C++0x] ICE on in(?)valid |constexpr constructors |in constexpr constructors Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-03-12 13:11:18 UTC --- I guess an ICE is one way to solve the missing diagnostic for PR 18016 ;) 4.5 didn't ICE, but then constexpr was ignored so I'm not sure it counts as a regression