Yes. So the behavior of vc10's decltype wrt this issue is in conformance with /current/ working paper -- which is broken, according to n3233. It will be discussed soon in Madrid. If the proposed wording is accepted (and I hope to god it is), then VC10's decltype --along with everybody else's-- will need to be fixed.
But please fix it anyway. :-)
Eric, is it still your opinion that enabling decltype for vc-10 in Boost.Config will break too much for it to be worth it?
I worked around the problem in Proto, so Proto and its dependencies should be ok -- so flip it, right? OTOH, we flip it, then users' code could break the way Proto did -- so don't flip it, right? OTOH, if n3233 gets rejected, then our hand is forced: vc10's decltype is strictly conforming, even if it breaks stuff -- so why not just flip it now, right? I've run out of hands, and I haven't seen a good option yet.
Sure, yeah, what the hell, flip the switch on trunk and see what breaks. Whee!
OK, enabled, fingers crossed and hopes for the best... John.