On 21/11/15 16:54 +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Sat, 21 Nov 2015, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
I forgot to respond to this, and never committed the patch, sorry.
I've committed the changes to htdocs/projects/cxx0x.html now, but
not the htdocs/bugs/index.html change.
I wasn't opposed to the bugs/i
On Sat, 21 Nov 2015, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> I forgot to respond to this, and never committed the patch, sorry.
>
> I've committed the changes to htdocs/projects/cxx0x.html now, but
> not the htdocs/bugs/index.html change.
I wasn't opposed to the bugs/index.html change, mind. Only
wondering a
On 06/10/15 12:39 -0400, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
People are being scared off by the experimental status on
https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html
e.g. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-10/msg00025.html
This makes it clear C++11 in 5.1 is no longer experi
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
People are being scared off by the experimental status on
https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html
e.g. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-10/msg00025.html
This makes it clear C++11 in 5.1 is no longer experimental.
Nice!
We also have a "Standard Confo
People are being scared off by the experimental status on
https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html
e.g. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-10/msg00025.html
This makes it clear C++11 in 5.1 is no longer experimental.
We also have a "Standard Conformance" section for G++ in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/
