RE: [VOTE] commit-then-review vs review-then-commit policy

[+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

[jira] Created: (STDCXX-423) LIMITS.cpp assumes integers with no padding bits

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:

RE: status of Windows builds

-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

RE: PING: Re: Building stdcxx with EDG eccp

-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

gcc inlining warnings (was: Re: EASTL)

[...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

Windows tests in red across the board

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

Re: Windows tests in red across the board

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:

[jira] Closed: (STDCXX-416) std::logic_error::~logic_error() too big to be inlined in exception.cpp

[ 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

Re: [VOTE] commit-then-review vs review-then-commit policy

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]