public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/49171] [C++0x][constexpr] Constant expressions support reinterpret_cast Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 16:22:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-49171-4-Oc7CxyHn5X@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-49171-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49171 --- Comment #4 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> 2012-10-03 16:22:24 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > Daniel, what's the status of this issue? Is there some consensus that GCC is > actually Ok, we don't really want to reject reinterpret_casts? My opinion is that gcc should start to implement the new core rules in regard to reinterpret_cast *except* for cases that are well-defined. > Because I would find very useful a constexpr std::addressof. For the time being > we could certainly have it constexpr anyway and change the implementation > details when/if the C++ front-end starts rejecting reintepret_casts, but I > would rather not. Exactly this usage of reinterpret_cast seems IMO to be well granted by the standard - at least by the way I read it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-03 16:22 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2011-05-26 12:10 [Bug c++/49171] New: " daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2011-05-26 12:13 ` [Bug c++/49171] " daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2011-08-30 9:52 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2012-10-03 14:28 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-10-03 16:22 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com [this message] 2012-10-03 16:46 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-10-03 18:46 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2012-10-05 14:10 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-10-05 14:17 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2012-10-23 23:00 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-10-23 23:02 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2014-11-18 13:44 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-04-27 17:51 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-08-23 16:41 ` myriachan at gmail dot com
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-49171-4-Oc7CxyHn5X@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).