On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Larisse Voufo <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This qualifier seems to have been added accidentally. (It is the only >> occurrence of basic_ostream within the same file that is qualified). >> >> I have been having a bit of trouble building libc++ successfully; and >> even when I got that done, I have been unable to run the regression tests >> successfully. So, I have not been able to verify that the changes I >> suggested in the attached patch won't break anything. >> >> That said, it'd be great to have someone take a look and apply it. >> > > Does this extra qualification break any conforming code, or just code that > tries to forward-declare basic_ostream? > I can't say for sure. The test case I provide is what I was able to reduce a much larger build failure down to. I should add that the failure occurs when C++14 is enabled.
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
