On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 at 11:32, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2022 at 09:34, Jonathan Wakely via Libstdc++ <
> libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> This passes testing (with -std=gnu++98/11/17/20) but is quite a large
>> patch for this late in stage 3. Does anybody object to doing this
On Wed, 12 Jan 2022 at 09:34, Jonathan Wakely via Libstdc++ <
libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> This passes testing (with -std=gnu++98/11/17/20) but is quite a large
> patch for this late in stage 3. Does anybody object to doing this now?
> The bugs it fixes were closed as INVALID because we're not
This passes testing (with -std=gnu++98/11/17/20) but is quite a large
patch for this late in stage 3. Does anybody object to doing this now?
The bugs it fixes were closed as INVALID because we're not actually
*required* to remove these or deprecate them. But users are right to
complain about us
