http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54413
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2012-08-30
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Severity|major |normal
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-08-30
09:55:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> While it
> is possible to turn off GCC's extensions for complex numbers for "old" C++ it
Is it? I don't think that's true.
> is impossible to combine the effects of -ansi with -std=c++11.
That's because -ansi means -std=c++98, it has nothing to do with whether
complex literals are supported.
(In reply to comment #1)
> [usrlit.suffix]/1 says that udlit suffixes that don't start with underscore
> are
> reserved.
Yes, for future UDLs. Peter's paper proposes new standard UDLs for standard
library types so in order for G++ to support them it must be able to tell the
preprocessor not to treat 1i as a complex literal, so the front-end can turn it
into a call to a UDL operator in the standard library.
