This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ 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]

Patch for 5708 reversion (was: Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/5708)

From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at unitus dot it>
To: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
Cc: ncm at cantrip dot org, bkoz at redhat dot com
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 09:39:35 +0100
Subject: Patch for 5708 reversion (was: Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/5708)
References: <3C716D57.F930CA07@unitus.it> <Pine.SOL.3.91.1020218131115.6554B-100000@taarna.cygnus.com> <20020218221832.A18081@cantrip.org> <3C718990.8FFA1F57@unitus.it> <3C71969C.F3FC6BFA@roguewave.com> <20020219010201.A57747@cantrip.org> <3C71BCFC.650D5D09@roguewave.com> <20020219033922.C57747@cantrip.org> <3C71D30E.37490494@roguewave.com>

Hi,

first many thanks to Nathan and Martin and everyone for this much needed
clarification.

At this point, after a closer reading of the standard prompted by Nathan, I
personally agree with his point of view (contra Josuttis interpretation and
Metrowerks implementation) and I would like to *revert* my "fix" for
libstdc++/5708.

Benjamin, do you agree?

Ciao,
Paolo.

References:
- [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/5708
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/5708
  - From: Benjamin Kosnik
- Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/5708
  - From: Nathan Myers
- Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/5708
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/5708
  - From: Martin Sebor
- Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/5708
  - From: Nathan Myers
- Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/5708
  - From: Martin Sebor
- Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/5708
  - From: Nathan Myers
- Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/5708
  - From: Martin Sebor

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