https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2954038c821d5f672db89938c4b6feedf29c30aa
commit r16-2329-g2954038c821d5f672db89938c4b6feedf29c30aa
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57b9afc9dad76f529969c548214b65dfe43652a7
commit r16-2253-g57b9afc9dad76f529969c548214b65dfe43652a7
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4faa42ac0dee2c26ed68f0df002837e7e1c95687
commit r16-2190-g4faa42ac0dee2c26ed68f0df002837e7e1c95687
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e0c3066c14ad98d130ddd1183be3caaeea19c63b
commit r16-894-ge0c3066c14ad98d130ddd1183be3caaeea19c63b
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think we should try to do this for GCC 16, so we don't have ODR violations
between -std=c++20 and -std=gnu++20 for anything that depends on
iterator_traits>>::iterator_category
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #0)
> Of course the ideal would be for WG14 to accept
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2425.pdf and then we can
> just say is_integer<__int128> is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #0)
> Our definitions of is_scalar depends on is_arithmetic, so
> is_scalar<__int128> is false, and therefore is_object<__int128> is false.
> This is clearly nonsen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
11 matches
Mail list logo
