Interesting! They've enabled it by default (I suppose as an extension?) in every standard (except -pedantic of course). One minor draw-back is that it appears to enjoy escaping tickmarks in the error message. I've opened a bug for it (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55678)Since yours is apparently ready to go in, but doesn't useWow, it's really easy to miss parallel development on the same issue.On 13.12.12 at 01:29, Daniel Santos<danielfsantos@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Sorry for my late response to this thread. I started another thread
addressing these issues (as well as a few others) back in September
(https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/28/1136). I've finally gotten ACKs from
maintainers with v6 of the patches (here
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/20/621) and I'm just waiting for 3.8-rc1
to re-submit them. I actually submitted these patches back in June as
part of a larger patch set, but broke it apart in September (I had way
to many changes for one patch set)
_Static_assert, I guess I'll wait for it to appear until I re-work
whatever might be left to actually make use of _Static_assert.
Jan