3dw...@verizon.net
On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 03:13:07 PM EST, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 at 19:15, Claudio Bantaloukas via Gcc
wrote:
>
> On 26/01/2024 17:51, Florin Mateoc via Gcc wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I am an experienced software developer, with
On 06/18/13, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 18 June 2013 07:04, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
> I understand that the literal operators for complex numbers for C++14
> faltered at least in part because of the perceived ugliness of the float
> operator:
>
> constexpr complex
> operator"" i_f(); // fugl
On 06/18/12, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>
> ... I suppose that for 4.8.0 we really want to bump the ABI, for many other
> reasons too, and be done with it.
>
> Paolo.
Would this bump include everything? Such as rebasing std::ios_base::failure
from std::exception to std::system_error and everything
Greetings,
Now that C++11 user-defined literals are in trunk I was thinking about
reclaiming some of the numeric suffixes that are currently recognized by gcc in
the preprocessor. The C++11 spec stipulates that any suffix that is recognized
by the implementation is not allowable as a user-defi
Nov 2, 2010 01:23:28 PM, jwakely@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 November 2010 15:13, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
>
> It would be great if you all could update
> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.6/cxx0x_status.html and related with all the great
> work that has gone into Objective-C++ recently.
http://gcc.gnu.o
Nov 2, 2010 01:23:28 PM, jwakely@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 November 2010 15:13, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
>
> It would be great if you all could update
> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.6/cxx0x_status.html and related with all the great
> work that has gone into Objective-C++ recently.
http://gcc.gnu.o
Oct 4, 2010 11:26:15 AM, ja...@redhat.com wrote:
>On 09/17/2010 02:25 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
>> I am slowly working on user defined literals for C++-0x.
>
>Thanks! Please send future patches to gcc-patches and me directly.
>
>Looking over your patch, I see you're doing a significant amount o
Sep 21, 2010 03:56:25 PM, rodrigorivasco...@gmail.com wrote:
>> 3. The big one: Getting the integer(long long) and float(long double)
>> suffixes that are not used by gcc out of the preprocessor. Then we
>can
>> build the calls.
>
>Just my two cents:
>Add an output parameter to the function "
Feb 26, 2010 01:43:15 PM, sch...@linux-m68k.org wrote:
Paolo Carlini writes:
> I'm tired. Anyway, I meant of course the size of the *data bits*, using
> your terminology. For *some* formats, like x87, where there are no
> holes, no padding bits in the middle of the representation, that is all
All,
I logged the bootstrap fail on obj-c++ as 37335.
Ed Smith-Rowland
10 matches
Mail list logo
