This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/26058] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] C++ error recovery regression
- From: "sabre at nondot dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 31 May 2006 19:13:26 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/26058] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] C++ error recovery regression
- References: <bug-26058-6809@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #4 from sabre at nondot dot org 2006-05-31 19:13 -------
I guess I don't follow your logic here. I agree that the EDG approach is
inferior to the current GCC implementation, but the current GCC approach is
inferior to the old GCC implementation (thus it's a regression, if not a very
important one). Why does EDG not doing well mean that GCC can't do well?
-Chris
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26058