--- Comment #17 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-04 15:36 ---
Closing 4.1 branch.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-27 19:30
---
*** Bug 32104 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.2 |4.1.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28088
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-08 09:49
---
*** Bug 29653 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-08 09:51
---
Another testcase, this one from some other code that uses boost:
template typename T struct has_begin {static const bool value =0;};
templatebool a struct sequence_tag_impl{};
template typename Sequence
struct
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28088
--- Comment #11 from bangerth at math dot tamu dot edu 2006-10-23 03:18
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] Internal compiler error on
boost mpl test/apply.cpp
Technically, I think it would be feasible to backport the patch. However,
because that patch eliminates a GNU extension
--- Comment #12 from fang at csl dot cornell dot edu 2006-10-23 03:34
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] Internal compiler error on
boost mpl test/apply.cpp
There were PRs that showed that this extension (for those who don't
remember: we allowed to match templates with trailing
--- Comment #13 from bangerth at math dot tamu dot edu 2006-10-23 04:01
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] Internal compiler error on
boost mpl test/apply.cpp
So maybe the question should be a different one: if it is difficult and/or
potentially risky to backport the patch
--- Comment #10 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-22 04:59
---
Technically, I think it would be feasible to backport the patch. However,
because that patch eliminates a GNU extension we would change the set of
programs accepted on the 4.1 branch. I'm not sure that's a good
--- Comment #9 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2006-10-21 04:28 ---
Mark,
is there any way for a backport of your patch to the 4.1 branch? This
appears to be a regression involving boost, and I got word from
people whose codes break with 4.1.x because of this...
Thanks
W.
--
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-04 16:57 ---
Unassining as pre Janis's request.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-05 14:23 ---
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x080f8a12 in type_dependent_expression_p (expression=0x0)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/cp/pt.c:12518
12518 if (TREE_CODE (expression)
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-05 20:35 ---
Regression tests using the reduced testcase from comment #3 on mainline for
powerpc-linux identified this patch where the test starts failing:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revrev=103604
r103604 | mmitchel
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-21 04:21 ---
4.0.3 20051105 fails by rejecting the code.
Likewise for 4.1.0 20060208.
But a real 4.0.3 accepts the code so this is a regression.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
15 matches
Mail list logo
