http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46922
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46922
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini 2011-03-15
19:03:01 UTC ---
Uhhhm, you are right, doesn't make much sense, I don't know what i was
thinking. Luckily we are still in time to move those lines in gnu.ver. Let me
know if you want me to do it or you
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46922
--- Comment #5 from Benjamin Kosnik 2011-03-15
18:43:21 UTC ---
Hey P, why was bad_function_call added in CXXABI instead of GLIBCXX? That
doesn't make sense to me.
-benjamin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46922
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46922
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-01-03 17:09:14 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Jan 3 17:09:12 2011
New Revision: 168435
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168435
Log:
2011-01-03 Paolo Carlini
PR libs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46922
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2011-01-03
16:33:46 UTC ---
Jakub, I'll commit momentarily the fix for std::bad_function_call. Can you take
care of the max_digits10 vs long double thing? You know it much better than me
and I don't know how to t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46922
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
