Re: [PATCH] [4.6] shared_ptr needs explicit copy constructor

2012-01-03 Thread Chase Douglas
On 01/03/2012 10:13 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 3 January 2012 18:07, Chase Douglas wrote: >> I rebuilt the library with this >> change to gcc and ran the test suite. All passed normally. > > That's what I needed to know, your original mail didn't say anything > about running the test suite. >

Re: [PATCH] [4.6] shared_ptr needs explicit copy constructor

2012-01-03 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 3 January 2012 18:07, Chase Douglas wrote: > I rebuilt the library with this > change to gcc and ran the test suite. All passed normally. That's what I needed to know, your original mail didn't say anything about running the test suite. Looking at the patch again, why have you added destructor

Re: [PATCH] [4.6] shared_ptr needs explicit copy constructor

2012-01-03 Thread Chase Douglas
On 01/03/2012 09:01 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 3 January 2012 16:59, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> On 3 January 2012 16:23, Chase Douglas wrote: >>> When compiling with a compiler that is conformant to the c++11 spec for PR >>> c++/50500, std::shared_ptr must have an explicitly defined copy constr

Re: [PATCH] [4.6] shared_ptr needs explicit copy constructor

2012-01-03 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 3 January 2012 17:13, Stephen M. Webb wrote: > On 01/03/2012 12:01 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> On 3 January 2012 16:59, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >>> On 3 January 2012 16:23, Chase Douglas wrote: When compiling with a compiler that is conformant to the c++11 spec for PR c++/50500, std::

Re: [PATCH] [4.6] shared_ptr needs explicit copy constructor

2012-01-03 Thread Stephen M. Webb
On 01/03/2012 12:01 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 3 January 2012 16:59, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> On 3 January 2012 16:23, Chase Douglas wrote: >>> When compiling with a compiler that is conformant to the c++11 >>> spec for PR c++/50500, std::shared_ptr must have an explicitly >>> defined copy co

Re: [PATCH] [4.6] shared_ptr needs explicit copy constructor

2012-01-03 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 3 January 2012 16:59, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 3 January 2012 16:23, Chase Douglas wrote: >> When compiling with a compiler that is conformant to the c++11 spec for PR >> c++/50500, std::shared_ptr must have an explicitly defined copy constructor. > > This has already been fixed in GCC 4.7, s

Re: [PATCH] [4.6] shared_ptr needs explicit copy constructor

2012-01-03 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 3 January 2012 16:23, Chase Douglas wrote: > When compiling with a compiler that is conformant to the c++11 spec for PR > c++/50500, std::shared_ptr must have an explicitly defined copy constructor. This has already been fixed in GCC 4.7, see PR 50500 PR 51699 is another example of Clang faili

Re: [PATCH] [4.6] shared_ptr needs explicit copy constructor

2012-01-03 Thread Chase Douglas
Fixing a typo when Cc'ing Matthias Klose. --- When compiling with a compiler that is conformant to the c++11 spec for PR c++/50500, std::shared_ptr must have an explicitly defined copy constructor. Backported from revision 180159. The rest of the revision includes new functionality, so only this

[PATCH] [4.6] shared_ptr needs explicit copy constructor

2012-01-03 Thread Chase Douglas
When compiling with a compiler that is conformant to the c++11 spec for PR c++/50500, std::shared_ptr must have an explicitly defined copy constructor. Backported from revision 180159. The rest of the revision includes new functionality, so only this part should be applied to 4.6. This has been te