From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 16BDC3850413; Mon, 3 Aug 2020 15:34:53 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 16BDC3850413 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1596468893; bh=xhQwcwFKTaiUn0QOEE2tNaNjp84KlE6O7XguFWCNMZ4=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=B8CZbZYYnDkA9dOZMluhf7kY9mNSS6/bt3L8S0FMw0Shy6XzCEJd4J7XkbMv/2+8T HJhcY3qLcU7R1EFNhKVbyZuQ0mLHeqX96RrhBvT6nU8tbB3ZsuHbEYZa7XutM58Qn8 4c/TJFLHCt2Zld8LNlTpXAJDfGxM2ek1bbtKwGHE= From: "whatwasthataddress at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libstdc++/96416] address_of() is broken by static_assert in pointer_traits Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2020 15:34:53 +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: whatwasthataddress at gmail dot com 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 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2020 15:34:53 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D96416 --- Comment #2 from Zach Laine --- Fair enough. [pointer.conversion] says that to_pointer(const Ptr& p) is "pointer_=C2=ADtraits=E2=80=8B::=E2=80=8Bto_=C2=ADaddress(p) if that e= xpression is well-formed (see [pointer.traits.optmem]), otherwise to_=C2=ADaddress(p.operator->())". Do = we then have a spec bug?=