--- Comment #11 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-21 00:06 ---
Fixed. The testcase works if you replace unique_future with future.
--
redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #10 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-21 00:02 ---
Subject: Bug 42201
Author: redi
Date: Thu Jan 21 00:01:47 2010
New Revision: 156097
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156097
Log:
2010-01-21 Jonathan Wakely
PR libstdc++/42201
--- Comment #9 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-20 23:38 ---
patch posted as http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-01/msg01126.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42201
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-20 14:46
---
Great.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42201
--- Comment #7 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-01-20 14:38
---
I was going to ask you the same thing :-)
I would like to update for 4.5, I'll send the patch when I get home in
a few hours
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42201
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-20 13:16
---
Jon, what do you think, shall we go ahead with this one too?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42201
--- Comment #5 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-12-22 10:48
---
I'm planning to send a patch for feedback in the next 48 hours, including
everything except atomic_future, because I think we need to implement
[util.smartptr.shared.atomic] to support atomic_future
--
http:/
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-22 10:04
---
I think Jon can take this, for the std::future work.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #3 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:38 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> The issue is pretty simple, actually: std::unique_future (which, by the way,
> will be renamed just std::future), is missing move assignment operator. Note,
> in N2914 it does *not* exist, has
