This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ 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: [libstd++] current tuple ebco patch

From: "Jonathan Wakely" <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
To: "Paolo Carlini" <pcarlini at suse dot de>
Cc: "Benjamin Kosnik" <bkoz at redhat dot com>, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:31:55 +0000
Subject: Re: [libstd++] current tuple ebco patch
References: <14229273.post@talk.nabble.com> <475C376B.4010206@suse.de> <fac6bb500712091230p1cf2968cg6a14e5b58f245859@mail.gmail.com> <20071210112858.5d8652c0@concorde.artheist.org> <475D7B06.5090608@suse.de>

On 10/12/2007, Paolo Carlini <pcarlini@suse.de> wrote:
> Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> > Please, can all of us do this?
> >
> :) I meant patches needing a review. Otherwise, the doubled posting
> seems pointless to me.

I'm not subscribed to gcc-patches, because I'm not interested in 90%
of it, so I've been surprised by some libstdc++ changes that I missed
because they only went to gcc-patches.  Not that "don't surprise jon"
should be a rule of course! but the contributor checklist _does_ still
say all patches should go to both lists :)

Jon

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [libstd++] current tuple ebco patch
  - From: Benjamin Kosnik
- Re: [libstd++] current tuple ebco patch
  - From: Paolo Carlini

References:
- Re: [libstd++] current tuple ebco patch
  - From: Chris Fairles
- Re: [libstd++] current tuple ebco patch
  - From: Benjamin Kosnik
- Re: [libstd++] current tuple ebco patch
  - From: Paolo Carlini

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