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: [C++ Patch / RFC] PR 46206

From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
To: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>, David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 20:24:31 -0400
Subject: Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] PR 46206
References: <CAGWvny=6Nx6W7u47KjisEu8uM_gGUZ8=GjFRyvDM1SrF9HdwYQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <5203DBEE dot 4000103 at oracle dot com> <CAGWvnymGgJaCX_d7L+wL+VH4h0m2-foUZwW7hrMt9yXWCz2HMA at mail dot gmail dot com> <5203E404 dot 8060500 at oracle dot com>

On 08/08/2013 02:31 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:

On 08/08/2013 08:18 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:

Why does the patch and fix have any architecture or OS-dependency?

Probably the same reason that subtle changes in the testcase changedwhether the bug appeared on x86_64-linux. I guess we should figure thatout instead of just saying "hunh, that's odd."


Jason

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] PR 46206
  - From: David Edelsohn
- Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] PR 46206
  - From: Paolo Carlini

References:
- Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] PR 46206
  - From: David Edelsohn
- Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] PR 46206
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] PR 46206
  - From: David Edelsohn
- Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] PR 46206
  - From: Paolo Carlini

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