Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Sep 2, 2005, at 2:30 PM, Richard B. Kreckel wrote: | > This lead to developer irritation because people expect that what | > compiled with GCC x.y.z should still compile with GCC x.y.z+1. | | I'll echo the generalized request that we try and avoid tightenings | on other than x.y.0 releases.
I hear you. In this specific case, it worths remembering people that the issue is not just an accept-invalid that was turned into reject-invalid, but wrong-code generation (in the sense that wrong-code was being genereted for *valid* program) that was fixed. C++ appears to be part of that small class of languages where an accept-invalid can hide a wrong-code.... -- Gaby
