On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Pawel Sikora <pl...@agmk.net> wrote: > On Monday 17 of January 2011 16:32:32 Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> 2011/1/17 Pawel Sikora : >> > >> > will 4.6 c++0x regression (experimental code) will be taken into account? >> > i'm assking because i'm currently use few c++0x features in my code base >> > with 4.5 and would be nice to have 4.6 with the same c++0x subset working. >> >> You can look at the priority field in bugzilla. If they have priority >> P1 then it means they should be fixed before 4.6 can be released e.g. >> PR 47067. If they aren't P1 (or there is no PR) then they won't block >> the release. > > i think about these 3 regressions: > > Bug 46552 - [4.6 Regression][C++0x] Internal compiler error on pointer to > member variable with template. > Bug 47311 - [4.6 Regression][C++0x] ICE in tsubst @cp/pt.c:10502. > Bug 47317 - [4.6 Regression][C++0x] ICE in fixed_type_or_null. > > they have P3 prio but afaics the P1/P2 are used for serious regressions in > released code. > c++0x implementation is still an experimental compiler feautre. > can we raise a prio for expreimental feature regression?
P3 means "unprioritized", thus they will at some point be P[1245]. I suppose they lack some initial analysis. Richard.
