On 3/17/20 11:25 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 at 16:52, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 at 16:42, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/17/20 9:04 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 17/03/20 13:02 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Shouldn't the test use { dg-do compile {
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 at 16:52, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 at 16:42, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >
> > On 3/17/20 9:04 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > On 17/03/20 13:02 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > >> Shouldn't the test use { dg-do compile { target c++11 } } instead of:
> >
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 at 16:42, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> On 3/17/20 9:04 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On 17/03/20 13:02 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >> Shouldn't the test use { dg-do compile { target c++11 } } instead of:
> >>
> >> +// { dg-do compile }
> >> +// { dg-options "-std=c++11" }
>
>
On 3/17/20 9:04 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 17/03/20 13:02 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Shouldn't the test use { dg-do compile { target c++11 } } instead of:
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++11" }
?
With that change I see:
UNSUPPORTED: g++.dg/ext/pr94197.C -std=c++98
On 17/03/20 13:02 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Shouldn't the test use { dg-do compile { target c++11 } } instead of:
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++11" }
?
With that change I see:
UNSUPPORTED: g++.dg/ext/pr94197.C -std=c++98
PASS: g++.dg/ext/pr94197.C -std=c++14 (test
Shouldn't the test use { dg-do compile { target c++11 } } instead of:
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++11" }
?
On 3/16/20 6:13 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 at 23:25, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
Tested on Linux-PPC64.
This ain't no regression. But it seems to hamper attempts to fix library
regressions (see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94033).
It occurred to me that
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 at 23:25, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
>
> Tested on Linux-PPC64.
>
> This ain't no regression. But it seems to hamper attempts to fix library
> regressions (see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94033).
It occurred to me that this can be done in one place.
2020-03-17
Tested on Linux-PPC64.
This ain't no regression. But it seems to hamper attempts to fix library
regressions (see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94033).
2020-03-16 Ville Voutilainen
gcc/
PR c++/94197
* cp/method.c (assignable_expr, constructible_expr): Push
a
