https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
--- Comment #9 from rhalbersma ---
Could this fix also be back-ported to gcc 10?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rhalbersma at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vermaelen.wouter at gmail dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ffd454b92ba6ff5499cf57f82a2b0f4cee59978c
commit r11-6305-gffd454b92ba6ff5499cf57f82a2b0f4cee59978c
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
--- Comment #4 from Will Wray ---
Thanks Jakub;
I applied your patch to trunk and ran more test cases for
nested arrays (including zero-size in various positions),
union element type, base classes - all passed as expected.
I tried to grok the pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
--- Comment #2 from Will Wray ---
For reference, here's a macro-free workaround to provide portable
operator<=> for templated classes with array members, defaulting
where possible (current Clang and MSVC) otherwise dispatching to
a user-defined i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
Will Wray changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wjwray at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
11 matches
Mail list logo
