Re: c++/7181: foo<n>::bar = foo<n-1>::bar + foo<n-2>::bar evaluates to zero at compile time

[Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>]

The following reply was made to PR c++/7181; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
To: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini@unitus.it>,
   "gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>,
   "gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>,
   "dobrynin@bigfoot.com" <dobrynin@bigfoot.com>,
   "gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>,
   Nathan Sidwell <nathan@codesourcery.com>
Cc:  
Subject: Re: c++/7181: foo<n>::bar = foo<n-1>::bar + foo<n-2>::bar evaluates
 to zero at compile time
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 13:33:06 -0700

 --On Tuesday, July 02, 2002 10:28:13 PM +0200 Paolo Carlini 
 <pcarlini@unitus.it> wrote:
 
 > Hi,
 >
 > from a very practical point of view, would be difficult to restore the
 > behaviour of 2.95.x? Note that Intel and Comeau adopts that "particular"
 > initialization order and the current "equivalent" one ;-) breaks a whole
 > body of literature on template metaprogramming...
 
 Perhaps.  It may also be that picking one order makes this example work,
 but some similar example fail.
 
 Certainly, you are welcome to contribute a patch.  If it isn't
 particularly ugly, and doesn't break conformance, I'd be in favor of
 accepting it.
 
 But, it's not a high priority for me -- and I'm focusing my GCC time on
 high-priority bugs and the new parser.
 
 -- 
 Mark Mitchell                mark@codesourcery.com
 CodeSourcery, LLC            http://www.codesourcery.com