This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [PATCH] PR c++/36408

From: Dodji Seketeli <dodji at redhat dot com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
Cc: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:06:32 +0100
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR c++/36408
References: <20091127214526.GL20004@adjoa.torimasen.com> <4B107F49.10508@redhat.com> <20091128075351.GM20004@adjoa.torimasen.com> <6dc9ffc80911282010h5b7584b2ya9a1d31959a5188b@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 08:10:37PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> The new testcase compiles without any error messages and failed.

Argh. You are right. Sigh.
I tested a patch on a tree and posted/committed another one from another
tree. Sorry about that.

Please find below two attanchments. The first one is the patch that I
tested and wanted to submit initially. The second one is the same patch,
but diff-ed against the current svn. So the second patch is what I would
commit now if it is accepted.

I carefully tested *this* patch this time.

Sorry again for the messing up.

        Dodji

Attachment: gcc-PR36408-patch-should-have-been-v3.txt
Description: Text document

Attachment: gcc-PR36408-patch-v3.txt
Description: Text document

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] PR c++/36408
  - From: Jason Merrill

References:
- [PATCH] PR c++/36408
  - From: Dodji Seketeli
- Re: [PATCH] PR c++/36408
  - From: Jason Merrill
- Re: [PATCH] PR c++/36408
  - From: Dodji Seketeli
- Re: [PATCH] PR c++/36408
  - From: H.J. Lu

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