http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33067
--- Comment #18 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2011-10-10 12:54:54 UTC --- Sorry, I'm an engineer (in this context). For me the issue is only the following: if I were a user of 4.7.0, I would rather prefer seeing: 33067.C:2:18: error: no match for ‘operator<’ in ‘1.100000000000000088817841970012523233890533447265625e+0 < t’ or 33067.C:2:18: error: no match for ‘operator<’ in ‘1.1e+0 < t’ ? Any other discussion, in this context, does not make sense to me, sorry. I'm not going to follow it. If the maintainers will reply on gcc-patches they want the latter, fine I'll do it, otherwise I'll just move to something else.
