------- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-25 21:15 ------- It turns out that the canonical types system is doing the right thing, and that the older type-comparison mechanisms are getting the wrong answer. This is still my bug, and it is a regression. Patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-01/msg01161.html -- dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2008-01-23 10:46:20 |2008-01-25 21:15:54 date| | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34935
