https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70076
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|msebor at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70076
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70076
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
The current behavior in this case is undefined. That should be avoided when it
can be done without excessive overhead. Throwing an exception instead has only
negligible overhead and is preferable to letting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70076
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #4)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #0)
> > > The G++ 4.9 Changes document
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70076
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70076
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #0)
> The G++ 4.9 Changes document (https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/changes.html)
> claims support for C++ VLAs including initializers (as specified in N3639).
I thought
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70076
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70076
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
