On 18 June 2014 21:02, Lukas Jirkovsky <l.jirkovsky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11 June 2014 22:12, Lukas Jirkovsky <l.jirkovsky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hello, >> I think hit a regression in gcc 4.9.0 when using a static constexpr >> member as a template parameter when used in a certain way. However, as >> the problem is a bit more complex wanted to ask whether this truly is >> a bug in gcc and not on my side before reporting it to bugtracker. > > I think I found the problematic commit: > > 18619da58c77461642c36cee9f0463c968877f75 is the first bad commit > commit 18619da58c77461642c36cee9f0463c968877f75 > Author: jason <jason@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4> > Date: Mon Apr 1 19:05:12 2013 +0000 > > * call.c (add_function_candidate): Take the address of 'this' here. > (build_over_call): And here. > (build_new_method_call_1, build_op_call_1): Not here. > (build_user_type_conversion_1): Or here. > (add_candidates): Adjust. > > git-svn-id: svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk@197317 > 138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4 > > :040000 040000 a2f3bbdf5c9b927d05f8aad43efded3ec0840226 > 948f452d681f4349c70dbad34e010e824c9f91e7 M gcc > > I will investigate more and report it as a bug, because it sure looks like one. Please do report a bug.
