[+1] All committers follow Commit-Then-Review for safe changes,
Review-Then-Commit for potentially breaking changes. What
constitutes a breakng change is a judgment call to be made
by each committer. The rule of thumb is that changes which
involve
LIMITS.cpp assumes integers with no padding bits
Key: STDCXX-423
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-423
Project: C++ Standard Library
Issue Type: Bug
Components:
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 5:13 AM
To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: status of Windows builds
I've been comparing our gcc test results on Windows with
those for MSVC. With the exception of locales where
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 11:54 PM
To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: PING: Re: Building stdcxx with EDG eccp
Farid, any progress on the test case or getting this to work?
No progress due to unable to
[...redirecting to stdcxx-dev...]
Eric Lemings wrote:
Also are you aware of lots of warnings about inlining in optimized
builds? Warnings like this:
warning: inlining failed in call to...
It's gcc 4.1.1 on RHAP 5.
I am but we're not keeping track of 'em all. There are two
separate issues
Uh oh, all our yesterday's builds on Windows are being reported
in the RUN state (and all red), even though the numbers and the
logs look okay to me (the logs are really hard to read so I might
be missing something). I hope it's just a glitch and not something
more serious than that.
Andrew, do
Glue script glitch.
I deployed a change to add support for detection of failed builds of the
exec utility on the windows side, and apparently I didn't test it as
well as I should have.
I'll look into it today, and hopefully will have a fix before I leave
for the day.
Martin Sebor wrote:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Martin Sebor closed STDCXX-416.
---
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 4.2
The warnings for the exception class dtors have
Sorry for the delay. Here's my vote:
On May 21, 2007, at 5:17 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I think the discussion has wound down so let's have a vote and
decide whether stdcxx committers should follow the Commit-Then
Review (CTR) or Review-Then-Commit (RTC) policy on stdcxx/trunk
by default.
[x]