This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug middle-end/25815] [4.1 regression] ext/pb_assoc/example/erase_if.cc execution test
- From: "pcarlini at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 8 Mar 2006 18:45:50 -0000
- Subject: [Bug middle-end/25815] [4.1 regression] ext/pb_assoc/example/erase_if.cc execution test
- References: <bug-25815-507@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #12 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-03-08 18:45 -------
(In reply to comment #11)
> I changed the PR component to a historically more probable one, to avoid
> blaming libstdc++, as it seems that's an conclusion you're trying to avoid.
Agreed, *as a miscompilation*, can be a regression. And, yes, I'm trying to
avoid that conclusion, because, really, the chances that something show up in
the libstdc++ side, without some help from you, a reduced testcase of sort, are
close to zero, given the evidence we have got to date. Again, in my opinion, in
such cases, it would be better to have available in Bugzilla an "unclassified"
component.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25815