This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC 8.5 Status Report (2020-03-04)
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely at redhat dot com>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 13:45:25 +0000
- Subject: Re: GCC 8.5 Status Report (2020-03-04)
- References: <20200304100911.GL2156@tucnak> <CAMe9rOowYXK+mZWdoh9c1Urnd28NpQxpSDdVzxLoY8Nyy8rsrg@mail.gmail.com> <20200304130141.GP2156@tucnak>
On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 at 13:02, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> The test says:
> // nl_NL chosen because it has no thousands separator (at this time).
> locale loc_it = locale(ISO_8859(15,nl_NL));
> so no wonder that it FAILs if nl_NL now has thousands separator.
Drat. I thought we could rely on the Dutch to keep things simple,
apparently even they want to keep changing things ;-)
> Maybe it is time for libstdc++ testsuite to create its own artificial
> locales and test against them.
Yes, maybe.
We do have a real bug here, which is that we don't support %p at all.
Even if we created our own locales that have fixed formats and don't
use %p, we're still be unable to deal with real locales that do use
%p.
Fixing all the bugs linked to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86976 is on my TODO list
for GCC 11.