http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
lailavrazda1979 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #17 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Apr 11 18:25:13 2014
New Revision: 209316
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209316root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/57926
* c-common.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to lailavrazda1979 from comment #14)
Why wait? I'm not hugely opposed, but bugfixes are bugfixes, and one more
fixed bug makes a better 4.9 release, right?
Because all
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #16 from lailavrazda1979 at gmail dot com ---
Okay, no worries.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 32575
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32575action=edit
patch
This patch forces the decay for C++. We don't need to do anything for C, since
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #14 from lailavrazda1979 at gmail dot com ---
Why wait? I'm not hugely opposed, but bugfixes are bugfixes, and one more fixed
bug makes a better 4.9 release, right?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #12 from lailavrazda1979 at gmail dot com ---
Bug still a problem with latest trunk.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #11 from lailavrazda1979 at gmail dot com ---
I don't mean to be a bother, but this hasn't been updated in a while. Has it
been fixed?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #10 from lailavrazda1979 at gmail dot com ---
Is this going to be fixed?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I don't know how exactly these builtins interact with overload resolution, but
it should be calling decay_conversion to turn arrays into pointers.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com ---
Short answer.. I'm not a sure, but it appears to be a g++ thing.
I looks like g++ is using ARRAY_TYPE instead of POINTER_TYPE. the 4.8 branch
does the same thing, but it does seem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com ---
btw, that patch passes bootstrap and a new testcase based on a modified version
of the bug report test.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
--- Comment #1 from lailavrazda1979 at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 30523
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30523action=edit
Code triggering the bug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
19 matches
Mail list logo
