This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFA: C++ PATCH for c++/37234 (defaulted functions)
- From: "Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: "Jason Merrill" <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "gcc-patches List" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 20:11:05 +0100
- Subject: Re: RFA: C++ PATCH for c++/37234 (defaulted functions)
- References: <493587CC.5050204@redhat.com>
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 8:09 PM, Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> wrote:
> The bug was that I was handling =default and =delete in a section that
> doesn't apply to templates; moving that code earlier in cp_function_decl
> fixes the bug.
>
> Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. As before, I think that fixes for bugs in new
> functionality should be allowed in the regression-only phase. OK to check
> this in? Can I also continue to check in bug fixes for other C++0x issues?
IMHO maintainers are free to make this decision themselves. Generally
important bugs include wrong-code and rejects-valid issues even if they
are not regressions.
Richard.