This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: C++ defect reports: how to behave


Joe Buck <jbuck@synopsys.com> wrote:

>>> IMO, we should implement the DR's without needing a separate switch
>>> for them.
>>
>> Just to be sure, you're suggesting to implement also all the defects with
>> "WP" status without a different dialect? Even if they modify the semantic
>> of existing programs?
>
> Issues with "WP" status are for the next version of the standard, so if
> they conflict with the current standard, they form a different dialect.
> But from my scanning of the list of "WP" issues, most are simply
> clarifications or corrections, some considered not important enough to go
> in now, so implementing them does not form a different dialect.

I don't mind either way. If there is consensus about implementing both TC1
and WP defect reports into -std=c++98, I'll prepare a little patch for
standards.texi specifying this. I would like to hear a comment from a C++
maintainer though.

Giovanni Bajo


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]