On 7/1/19 10:33 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 4:55 PM Martin Sebor
wrote:>
[Adding gcc-patches]
Richard, do you have any further comments or is the revised patch
good to commit?
No further comments from my side - it's good to commit.
After running a full bootstrap with
On 7/1/19 10:33 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 4:55 PM Martin Sebor
wrote:>
[Adding gcc-patches]
Richard, do you have any further comments or is the revised patch
good to commit?
No further comments from my side - it's good to commit.
After running a full bootstrap with
On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 4:55 PM Martin Sebor wrote:>
> [Adding gcc-patches]
>
> Richard, do you have any further comments or is the revised patch
> good to commit?
No further comments from my side - it's good to commit.
Richard.
> Martin
>
> On 6/25/19 2:30 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On
On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 4:55 PM Martin Sebor wrote:>
> [Adding gcc-patches]
>
> Richard, do you have any further comments or is the revised patch
> good to commit?
No further comments from my side - it's good to commit.
Richard.
> Martin
>
> On 6/25/19 2:30 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On
[Adding gcc-patches]
Richard, do you have any further comments or is the revised patch
good to commit?
Martin
On 6/25/19 2:30 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/25/19 3:53 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 24/06/19 19:42 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:35 PM Martin Sebor
[Adding gcc-patches]
Richard, do you have any further comments or is the revised patch
good to commit?
Martin
On 6/25/19 2:30 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/25/19 3:53 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 24/06/19 19:42 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:35 PM Martin Sebor
On 6/25/19 3:53 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 24/06/19 19:42 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:35 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/24/19 6:11 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:17 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>>
>> On 6/21/19 6:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
On 24/06/19 19:42 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:35 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/24/19 6:11 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:17 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>>
>> On 6/21/19 6:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 5:15 AM Martin Sebor
On 6/24/19 11:42 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:35 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/24/19 6:11 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:17 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/21/19 6:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 5:15 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:35 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 6/24/19 6:11 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:17 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>
> >> On 6/21/19 6:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 5:15 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> Bug 90923 shows
On 6/24/19 6:11 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:17 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/21/19 6:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 5:15 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
Bug 90923 shows that even though GCC hash-table based containers
like hash_map can be instantiated on
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:17 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 6/21/19 6:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 5:15 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>
> >> Bug 90923 shows that even though GCC hash-table based containers
> >> like hash_map can be instantiated on types with user-defined
On 6/21/19 6:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 5:15 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
Bug 90923 shows that even though GCC hash-table based containers
like hash_map can be instantiated on types with user-defined ctors
and dtors they invoke the dtors of such types without invoking
the
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 5:15 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> Bug 90923 shows that even though GCC hash-table based containers
> like hash_map can be instantiated on types with user-defined ctors
> and dtors they invoke the dtors of such types without invoking
> the corresponding ctors.
>
> It was
Let me try that again to the right list.
On 6/18/19 9:14 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Bug 90923 shows that even though GCC hash-table based containers
like hash_map can be instantiated on types with user-defined ctors
and dtors they invoke the dtors of such types without invoking
the corresponding
Bug 90923 shows that even though GCC hash-table based containers
like hash_map can be instantiated on types with user-defined ctors
and dtors they invoke the dtors of such types without invoking
the corresponding ctors.
It was thanks to this bug that I spent a day debugging "interesting"
16 matches
Mail list logo