--- Comment #14 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-25 16:40 ---
Subject: Bug 4
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Mar 25 16:39:51 2010
New Revision: 157726
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157726
Log:
Backport regression testcases from mainline.
2010-03-25 H.J. Lu
--- Comment #8 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-22 16:34 ---
Re comment #6: well, then we still need to fix the c++98 case.
Re comment #7: note carefully how I have avoided is_pod in the testcase,
but instead used the internal mean to implement the former. That's the
regression
--- Comment #9 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-03-22 16:43
---
Michael, I'm not sure to follow all the philosophical details of the issue. To
be sure:
1- __is_pod implements, to date, the correct C++0x semantics, modulo ISO DRs
(probably forthcoming, but a resolution
--- Comment #10 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-22 16:54 ---
Hmm, well, but there's code out there that expects the old TR1 semantic,
namely blocxx, and if the definition is indeed muddled than IMNSHO we should
retain the behaviour as it was in older GCC versions, instead of
--- Comment #11 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-03-22 17:07
---
We discussed a bit the issue with Jason in Pittsburgh *before* realizing that
likely the C++1x WD is wrong about not categorizing strPOD as POD, which now
seems the real issue. My personal point of view is
--- Comment #12 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-22 20:39 ---
Subject: Bug 4
Author: jason
Date: Mon Mar 22 20:38:57 2010
New Revision: 157652
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157652
Log:
PR c++/4
* tree.c (pod_type_p): Use old
--- Comment #13 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-22 20:49 ---
Fixed by reverting to old semantics in C++98 mode.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-03-15 17:23
---
An additional remark: irrespective of the C++1x PODness, the *TR1* is_pod
cannot be broken, because essentially N1836, not requiring compiler support,
allows for any behavior outside scalar types (see 4.9/8).
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-11 16:24 ---
Confirmed. 4.4 works as well.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-03-11 16:41
---
I would be willing to work on this, of course, but I can't really do it now
because I'm traveling and I don't have with me all the tools I need.
Anyway, we do already have a testcase involving a pair of
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2010-03-11 17:01 ---
Subject: Re: New: __is_pod seems broken
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 11, 2010, at 8:03 AM, matz at gcc dot gnu dot org
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org
wrote:
On r157245 (and former revisions) this testcase will abort:
--- Comment #4 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-11 17:12 ---
it's both trivial and standard layout, so is a POD
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-11 21:12 ---
It is caused by revision 149721:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-07/msg00602.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #6 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-12 02:48 ---
strPOD isn't trivial; its copy assignment operator is ill-formed/deleted. This
is a change in PODness between C++98 and C++0x which may not have been
intended.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
16 matches
Mail list logo
