--- Comment #2 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-16 22:37 ---
You're right: it works with -fabi-version is 0. Closing as invalid.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39208
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-06 20:19 ---
This bug should be really easy to fix, now that GCC has canonical types. Just
map each of the template type arguments down to its canonical type before doing
the substitution.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-14 15:05 ---
Subject: Bug 37553
Author: dgregor
Date: Tue Oct 14 15:03:51 2008
New Revision: 14
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=14
Log:
2008-10-14 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-24 20:20 ---
GCC is doing the right thing here. In this constructor:
Thing2(Thing2&& o) : Thing(o) { }
the parameter "o" is treated as an lvalue, because it has a name. Using
std::move(o) to treat it as an
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-24 13:51 ---
We need to look at CALL_EXPR_FN's type because the decltype of a call retrieves
the return type of the the function called, which may be a REFERENCE_TYPE. The
type of the expression will have stripped away
--- Comment #8 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-05 17:06 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-05 17:05 ---
Subject: Bug 37342
Author: dgregor
Date: Fri Sep 5 17:04:12 2008
New Revision: 140037
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140037
Log:
2008-09-05 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #6 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-04 05:42 ---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-09/msg00321.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37342
--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-04 04:35 ---
Thanks for the reduced test case. I'm on it.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #1 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-23 04:59 ---
Created an attachment (id=16133)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16133&action=view)
Test case illustrating the problem
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37208
y: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37208
--- Comment #7 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 19:12 ---
Fixed on the trunk.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 19:09 ---
Subject: Bug 36460
Author: dgregor
Date: Wed Aug 6 19:08:12 2008
New Revision: 138819
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=138819
Log:
2008-08-06 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 14:30 ---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-08/msg00382.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36460
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #10 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-01 14:05
---
(In reply to comment #9)
> > - the error message we give in this case is pretty poor. Here we have an
> >empty initializer, but the error message we get back is "void value not
> >ignor
--- Comment #8 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-01 11:55 ---
Thanks Jakub, Dodji for working on this. Some comments:
Some nits:
- the error message we give in this case is pretty poor. Here we have an
empty initializer, but the error message we get back is "void valu
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-07 23:28 ---
The problem here is that fold() is simplifying the expression before we look at
its type. The simplification here turns something that's not a function call (a
conditional expression) into a function call, th
--- Comment #2 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-14 13:56 ---
The links on the C++0x status web pages have been fixed.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35722
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 14:54 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 14:54 ---
Subject: Bug 35704
Author: dgregor
Date: Thu Mar 27 14:53:57 2008
New Revision: 133643
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133643
Log:
2008-03-27 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-19 13:12 ---
This is core issue 664:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#664
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34022
--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-01 16:29 ---
Fixed on mainline and 4.3 branch.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-01 05:38 ---
Subject: Bug 35315
Author: dgregor
Date: Sat Mar 1 05:37:41 2008
New Revision: 132798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132798
Log:
2008-02-29 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-29 21:42 ---
Subject: Bug 35315
Author: dgregor
Date: Fri Feb 29 21:41:38 2008
New Revision: 132779
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132779
Log:
2008-02-29 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #1 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-26 07:16 ---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg01272.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35315
--- Comment #1 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 19:55 ---
After discussing this with Howard Hinnant, we agree that it is a bug. I'll
handle it.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 17:35 ---
Fixed for 4.3
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 17:35 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 17:34 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 17:33 ---
Subject: Bug 35024
Author: dgregor
Date: Fri Feb 15 17:33:02 2008
New Revision: 132348
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132348
Log:
2008-02-15 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #2 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 17:33 ---
Subject: Bug 35023
Author: dgregor
Date: Fri Feb 15 17:33:02 2008
New Revision: 132348
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132348
Log:
2008-02-15 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #2 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 17:33 ---
Subject: Bug 35026
Author: dgregor
Date: Fri Feb 15 17:33:02 2008
New Revision: 132348
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132348
Log:
2008-02-15 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #1 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 03:52 ---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg00529.html
We could tweak this ice-on-invalid-code to create some ice-on-valid-code
failures. See the e-mail with the patch.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #1 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 03:51 ---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg00529.html
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 03:51 ---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg00529.html
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 03:35 ---
This test case actually exposes two (!) related issues, one of which is a
rejects-valid:
template class X> void foo(X<0>);
and the other, which is an ice-on-valid-code:
template class X> void foo
--- Comment #12 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 03:10
---
Thanks, Mark! Fixed on mainline.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 03:10
---
Subject: Bug 34050
Author: dgregor
Date: Fri Feb 15 03:09:18 2008
New Revision: 132331
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132331
Log:
2008-02-14 Douglas Gregor <[EMAI
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-14 21:38 ---
This code is actually ill-formed. The problem is here:
bind(h, forward(args...))
For N arguments, the second argument expands to:
bind(h, forward(args1, args2, ..., argsN))
However, that's ill-formed be
--- Comment #7 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-11 18:59 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-11 18:59 ---
Subject: Bug 35113
Author: dgregor
Date: Mon Feb 11 18:58:16 2008
New Revision: 132242
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132242
Log:
2008-02-11 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-07 19:06 ---
Fixed.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-07 19:04 ---
Subject: Bug 35115
Author: dgregor
Date: Thu Feb 7 19:03:40 2008
New Revision: 132173
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132173
Log:
2008-02-06 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #2 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-07 18:59 ---
This is fallout from my comptypes patch.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-07 18:56 ---
This is definitely a canonical-types bug.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-06 18:50
---
Fixed in mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-06 18:49
---
Subject: Bug 35049
Author: dgregor
Date: Wed Feb 6 18:49:03 2008
New Revision: 132152
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132152
Log:
2008-02-06 Douglas Gregor <[EMAI
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-06 18:49 ---
Subject: Bug 35096
Author: dgregor
Date: Wed Feb 6 18:49:03 2008
New Revision: 132152
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132152
Log:
2008-02-06 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #9 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-06 15:18 ---
*** Bug 35096 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-06 15:18 ---
This is the comptypes issue dealt with in PR 35049. I've verified that the fix
for that issue handles this test case, too.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 35049 ***
--
dgregor at gcc dot gn
--- Comment #8 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-05 18:06 ---
Well, this was a fun one. Patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg00146.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35049
--- Comment #7 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-05 14:35 ---
This is a canonical types issue; I'm on it.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #11 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-05 13:34
---
This latest problem is identical to PR c++/35074, which has now been fixed. The
new test case in this bug is passing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33620
--- Comment #6 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-05 13:30 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-05 13:30 ---
Subject: Bug 35074
Author: dgregor
Date: Tue Feb 5 13:29:43 2008
New Revision: 132120
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132120
Log:
2008-02-05 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-04 23:31 ---
Looking into this a little bit, the new save_template_attributes is modifying
the type node directly (adding new attributes), but that type node can then get
out of sync with other type nodes if it was the
--- Comment #6 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-31 20:08 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-31 20:07 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-31 20:07 ---
Subject: Bug 34935
Author: dgregor
Date: Thu Jan 31 20:06:33 2008
New Revision: 131984
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131984
Log:
2008-01-31 Douglas Gregor <[EMAI
--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-31 20:07 ---
Subject: Bug 34936
Author: dgregor
Date: Thu Jan 31 20:06:33 2008
New Revision: 131984
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131984
Log:
2008-01-31 Douglas Gregor <[EMAI
--- Comment #8 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:24 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34219
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:27 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:26 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:26 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:25 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:25 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:25 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:24
---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:24 ---
Fixed in mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:22 ---
Actually, I don't know whether max is valid or not. My
inclination is that it is invalid, because when Params is empty, it becomes an
invalid specialization max. (This happens, for example, if we try to comput
--- Comment #2 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:01 ---
Subject: Bug 34754
Author: dgregor
Date: Tue Jan 29 13:59:59 2008
New Revision: 131938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131938
Log:
2008-01-29 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:01 ---
Subject: Bug 34753
Author: dgregor
Date: Tue Jan 29 13:59:59 2008
New Revision: 131938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131938
Log:
2008-01-29 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:01 ---
Subject: Bug 34919
Author: dgregor
Date: Tue Jan 29 13:59:59 2008
New Revision: 131938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131938
Log:
2008-01-29 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #2 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:01 ---
Subject: Bug 34755
Author: dgregor
Date: Tue Jan 29 13:59:59 2008
New Revision: 131938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131938
Log:
2008-01-29 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #6 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:01 ---
Subject: Bug 34219
Author: dgregor
Date: Tue Jan 29 13:59:59 2008
New Revision: 131938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131938
Log:
2008-01-29 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #8 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:01 ---
Subject: Bug 34055
Author: dgregor
Date: Tue Jan 29 13:59:59 2008
New Revision: 131938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131938
Log:
2008-01-29 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #2 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:01 ---
Subject: Bug 34961
Author: dgregor
Date: Tue Jan 29 13:59:59 2008
New Revision: 131938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131938
Log:
2008-01-29 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #16 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:01
---
Subject: Bug 34103
Author: dgregor
Date: Tue Jan 29 13:59:59 2008
New Revision: 131938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131938
Log:
2008-01-29 Douglas Gregor <[EMAI
--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-29 14:01 ---
Subject: Bug 34606
Author: dgregor
Date: Tue Jan 29 13:59:59 2008
New Revision: 131938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131938
Log:
2008-01-29 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-28 23:40 ---
There are some problems with the example code. For example, the expression
max does not expand the parameter pack "Params". The compiler should
have warned you about this, both in this case and in the sta
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-28 22:08 ---
This one's mine.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #7 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-28 22:05 ---
Darn! Mine again.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-28 21:59 ---
Confirmed. This is mine.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-28 21:58 ---
Yep, we should be diagnosing but this error but we aren't. I'm on it.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #8 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-28 21:52 ---
This is fixed on the trunk. Marking it as such...
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #15 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-28 21:35
---
Thanks everyone; I can reproduce this on i686-pc-linux-gnu. Patch in the works.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-25 21:16 ---
I don't know if this is a regression or not, but it's roughly the same issue as
PR 34395 and is fixed by the same patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-01/msg01161.html
--
dgregor at gcc d
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-25 21:15 ---
It turns out that the canonical types system is doing the right thing, and that
the older type-comparison mechanisms are getting the wrong answer. This is
still my bug, and it is a regression. Patch here:
http
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 16:48 ---
Fixed for C++0x.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
1 - 100 of 317 matches
Mail list logo
