[Bug c++/50855] [C++0x] Name mangling for late return types invoking constructors not implemented

2012-01-09 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50855 Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/50855] [C++0x] Name mangling for late return types invoking constructors not implemented

2012-01-06 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50855 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-06 21:39:51 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Fri Jan 6 21:39:43 2012 New Revision: 182970 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=182970 Log: PR c++/6057 PR

[Bug c++/50855] [C++0x] Name mangling for late return types invoking constructors not implemented

2011-10-24 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50855 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at

[Bug c++/50855] [C++0x] Name mangling for late return types invoking constructors not implemented

2011-10-24 Thread public at alisdairm dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50855 --- Comment #2 from Alisdair Meredith public at alisdairm dot net 2011-10-24 14:06:55 UTC --- It might be. I still see an ICE for PR50853, but if that is giving the same error now, then it is probably the same root cause. I'm still waiting to

[Bug c++/50855] [C++0x] Name mangling for late return types invoking constructors not implemented

2011-10-24 Thread public at alisdairm dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50855 --- Comment #3 from Alisdair Meredith public at alisdairm dot net 2011-10-24 14:13:31 UTC --- And just to confirm - it sounds like the ICE in PR50853 is a bad compiler at my end. I suggest keeping *this* PR open, as at least it reports the