http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55714
Bug #: 55714
Summary: gentoo sys-devel/llvm-3.1r2 compilation segfaults
x86_64-pc-linux-gnux32-g++
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55714
--- Comment #3 from piotr5 at netscape dot net 2012-12-22 12:11:52 UTC ---
Created attachment 29026
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29026
the requested preprocessor output
youn probably are right it's a d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58051
piotr5 at netscape dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||piotr5 at netscape dot net
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: piotr5 at netscape dot net
this has been suggested for addition in the next standard. it is an important
element of c++ because iterator-code can become quite incomprehensible
otherwise. but the main reason I'd like to see it as pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61617
--- Comment #4 from piotr5 at netscape dot net ---
thanks anyway. so what is the standards comitee's "direction" for making
arbitrary-width-tree iterators more comprehensible, if not an iteration over
multiple children for each lev
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: piotr5 at netscape dot net
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 54548
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54548&action=edit
my failed attempt at a minimal example after preprocessor
I'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108955
--- Comment #2 from piotr5 at netscape dot net ---
Created attachment 54549
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54549&action=edit
gunzip then: c++-13 -c delme-E13.cxx
also fails with c++-12 so the problem must be
