From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 80026 invoked by alias); 23 May 2016 17:30:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 79994 invoked by uid 89); 23 May 2016 17:30:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:752 X-HELO: mail-qk0-f174.google.com Received: from mail-qk0-f174.google.com (HELO mail-qk0-f174.google.com) (209.85.220.174) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 23 May 2016 17:30:36 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f174.google.com with SMTP id n63so112922455qkf.0 for ; Mon, 23 May 2016 10:30:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=D+KmLm0iIOSRRFZaUzu0E/ISnCXJhDqm6hdUepYcJsg=; b=mpaxy0jjOAMt0jI3lbmzrBqkzr3PZqEFruH3hNTOe8NGKDakm0o01UUWgoVLkyefET yCHLilImcINigLtuWBvQlUsHQc5Qu2OWDYFnct3cklGt/HXHiV9bUcf1Y6IVibb5hB7n JqVeYn/Ag+NULWA8BnURbzilMpp8P6I/o6BNSpyIpqyDh5IwhNzOtUUGZlys129Scdtt 2OzAZI+21zlcCR4ZMwkz7yAwG9BOW+RHnpROLxrDOLpdyVLFIdvuiYxJ4QmOa28ur+8Q n+K0bs91HT6qMlHY9j6A28QtiqccOlAoUEOHpnSGRu/eyTahaPf7gdkIdj5BJcdWZ5Sq bCpA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXej4DPXnxxt/x87eEJk0OxMzRjHMCsDUFgtygpi/UPOFZsPKFjsakXCCs5x4zFtFDX X-Received: by 10.55.198.147 with SMTP id s19mr16876818qkl.119.1464024633908; Mon, 23 May 2016 10:30:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.50] (209-6-90-240.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com. [209.6.90.240]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n95sm4936722qte.28.2016.05.23.10.30.33 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 23 May 2016 10:30:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [C++ Patch] PR 69095 To: Paolo Carlini , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org References: <5741F9D9.6040906@oracle.com> <574320E7.6080909@oracle.com> From: Jason Merrill Message-ID: <757029d2-7904-99d2-2931-1985551c390b@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 17:30:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <574320E7.6080909@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-05/txt/msg01827.txt.bz2 On 05/23/2016 11:25 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > On 23/05/2016 15:32, Jason Merrill wrote: >> On 05/22/2016 02:26 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: >>> finally sending a patch for this issue. As noticed by submitter himself, >>> it appears to boil down to a rather straightforward case of not >>> rejecting unexpanded parameter packs in default arguments. In order to >>> handle all the combinations (in/out of class, template >>> parameter/function parameter) I added calls of >>> check_for_bare_parameter_packs both to cp_parser_default_argument and >>> cp_parser_late_parsing_default_args >> >> Hmm, would it make sense to check in cp_parser_initializer? > Oh yes. The below is already past g++.dg/tm... OK if testing passes. Jason