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++ testcase question: pointers to member functions

From: Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>
To: Janis Johnson <janis187 at us dot ibm dot com>
Cc: Joe Buck <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 11:14:57 -0800
Subject: Re: C++ testcase question: pointers to member functions
References: <20050209001422.GA8273@us.ibm.com> <20050209004730.GA5381@synopsys.com> <44783F38-583D-4C10-8BA7-964C49F44E07@apple.com> <20050209172806.GA4244@us.ibm.com>

On Feb 9, 2005, at 9:28 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:

The test doesn't work now, so apparently the curious extension is
gone and no one has complained about its absence.  Should the test
be removed, or is worth keeping it with dg-bogus replaced by
dg-error?

If we want the feature to go (I think this is safe, despite that internally I think we are hitting it), the testcase should be removed. If someone steps forward to argue for the feature, they can always put the testcase back in, if the feature is accepted. So, I think it is safe to disappear it now.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: C++ testcase question: pointers to member functions
  - From: Mark Mitchell

References:
- C++ testcase question: pointers to member functions
  - From: Janis Johnson
- Re: C++ testcase question: pointers to member functions
  - From: Joe Buck
- Re: C++ testcase question: pointers to member functions
  - From: Mike Stump
- Re: C++ testcase question: pointers to member functions
  - From: Janis Johnson

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