--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-31 20:07 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Statu
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-31 20:07 ---
Subject: Bug 34935
Author: dgregor
Date: Thu Jan 31 20:06:33 2008
New Revision: 131984
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131984
Log:
2008-01-31 Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ja
--- 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://g
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-23 16:20 ---
CCing the canonical type expert.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-23 10:46 ---
Confirmed. They should not have the same canonical type.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34935
