From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 50E15385702C; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:45:18 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 50E15385702C
From: "dangelog at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/96416] address_of() is broken by static_assert in
 pointer_traits
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:45:17 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dangelog at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-96416-4-IIKlfdi9Ib@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-96416-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-96416-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:45:18 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D96416

--- Comment #10 from Giuseppe D'Angelo <dangelog at gmail dot com> ---
(By the way, finding this bug is quite hard. Could "address_of" be changed =
to
"to_address" , in the bug description? I think that's the intended meaning.
And, "to_pointer", mentioned a few times, doesn't exist.)=