http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46207
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46207
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46207
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini 2010-10-29
11:09:25 UTC ---
So this is part of
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3164.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46207
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2010-10-28
11:11:09 UTC ---
I haven't followed it, but it wouldn't surprise me if a few issues were closed
as NAD Editorial without actually being fixed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46207
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46207
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2010-10-28
09:59:43 UTC ---
Thanks Jon, much better implementing it ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46207
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2010-10-28
09:54:24 UTC ---
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#879
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46207
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2010-10-28
09:50:37 UTC ---
Note, we have a much more general issue with atomic<_Tp*> vs atomic_address:
everywhere we are assuming _Tp is not cv-qualified and this is not going to
work with atomic_address, which
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46207
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|