Re: C++ PATCH: Fix PR 266

[Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>]

>>>>> "Mark" == Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> writes:

> I'm trying to be as conservative as possible.  I *think* these changes
> are simple and safe -- but I'm never 100% sure.  As for 3.0.1, that's
> going to be fixing important bugs in 3.0, right?  Since none of these
> were regressions from 2.95.2, they can't really be affecting existing
> code very much, so I guess I'm not seeing them as that important.

I suppose I figure that if someone's entered it into GNATS, it's affecting
some existing code, though it's hard for me to guess how widespread the
problem is without reading gcc-bugs more than I do.  I've thought for quite
a while that it would be nice to have an ombudsman volunteer, who would
watch the bug reports and tell the developers what users are asking
for/complaining about most frequently, so that we would have a better idea
of priorities.

> I guess I'm more comfortable taking a pretty bright-line approach, as
> outlined in my original mail.  If there are individual fixes that
> you/we/users think are truly important, even though they're not
> regressions, let's take them case by case.

> Is that fair?

OK.

Jason