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] |
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 10:51:09PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:55:58AM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > >Is this OK? Have I correctly described the extensions? > > Thank you for taking a stab at the documentation. Not a very good stab, but I'll get there in the end :-) Thanks for the help getting it right. > Not quite. There are two completely orthogonal extensions: (1) we allow > floating-point literals in integral constant expressions, and (2) we > allow in-class initialization of static data members of floating-point type. > > An example of (1) without (2) is something like: > > enum E { e = int(2.2 + 3.7) }; > > which is invalid ISO C++, but is accepted by G++, without -pedantic. Of course - doesn't have to be in an initializer. Duh. > >Should I try to > >fix the alignment of the menu at the top of the file? > > Joseph Myers is probably the right person to ask about that. Then I might do that separately some other time. > I think that you should also move these descriptions under "Deprecated > Features", as nobody objected to deprecating this extension. That makes the patch much smaller. New version attached. jon -- No sig today
Attachment:
gcc-doc_non_integral_init.2.patch
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |