On 20 May 2011 17:32, Jason Merrill wrote:
G++ has had a long-standing bug with unqualified name resolution in
templates: if we didn't find any declaration when looking up a name in the
template definition, we would do an additional unqualified lookup at the
point of instantiation. This led
Hi,
That only shows up if you configure with --enable-libstcxx-time
I'll finish reg-testing it and submit it when I get home this evening.
thanks Jon. Looks like we have also to fix parallel-mode (49187), I hope
there isn't too much to reshuffle, if you spot something...
Thanks again,
Paolo.
On 05/27/2011 11:05 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
That only shows up if you configure with --enable-libstcxx-time
I'll finish reg-testing it and submit it when I get home this evening.
thanks Jon. Looks like we have also to fix parallel-mode (49187), I
hope there isn't too much to reshuffle,
On 27 May 2011 09:30, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
I think this piece is also needed due to the fix for 29131:
Index: include/std/thread
===
--- include/std/thread (revision 174307)
+++ include/std/thread (working copy)
@@ -260,12
On 05/24/2011 05:59 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
It occurred to me today that I could use current_class_name rather
than TYPE_IDENTIFIER (current_class_type).
Thus I suppose the below is also ok and obvious? To be safe, I'm testing
it on x86_64-linux.
Paolo.
//
2011-05-24
OK.
Jason
It occurred to me today that I could use current_class_name rather than
TYPE_IDENTIFIER (current_class_type).
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
commit d40ebc9ef2be8ab9b4d71410d9797442b2c16d9a
Author: Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com
Date: Mon May 23 15:23:42 2011 -0400
* pt.c
G++ has had a long-standing bug with unqualified name resolution in
templates: if we didn't find any declaration when looking up a name in
the template definition, we would do an additional unqualified lookup at
the point of instantiation. This led to incorrectly finding
namespace-scope
On 05/20/2011 06:32 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Are the library changes OK for trunk?
The changes look fine to me.
Paolo.
On 05/20/2011 01:01 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Ah, I had always assumed that the previous implementation was exploiting
a license given by the standard which says that both contexts should
yield the same resolution, otherwise the program was ill-formed, no diagnostic
required.
I believe that
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/20/2011 01:01 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Ah, I had always assumed that the previous implementation was exploiting
a license given by the standard which says that both contexts should
yield the same resolution,
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 09:32:16AM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote:
G++ has had a long-standing bug with unqualified name resolution in
templates: if we didn't find any declaration when looking up a name in
the template definition, we would do an additional unqualified lookup at
the point of
On 20 May 2011, at 20:30, Joe Buck wrote:
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 09:32:16AM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote:
G++ has had a long-standing bug with unqualified name resolution in
templates: if we didn't find any declaration when looking up a name in
the template definition, we would do an
On 05/20/2011 03:45 PM, Christopher Jefferson wrote:
I could see the temptation to introduce this as a mandatory warning for a
while, and only add it under -pedantic. However, it might be easier to just
force people to fix their code.
With the patch I just checked in it's an error by default
14 matches
Mail list logo
