On 4 November 2011 20:53, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Oops, I was ignoring the pings when looking for the actual patch. :)
> But in general I've been only been using maybe_warn_cpp0x for larger
> features.
Understood. Modification to cp-tree.h make rebuilds heavier, so I don't feel
strongly about it.
On 11/04/2011 02:37 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On 4 November 2011 19:38, Jason Merrill wrote:
Applied. Sorry for the delay, thanks for the pings.
So we want to pedwarn directly in parser, rather than use maybe_warn_cpp0x?
Magnus did a newer revision of the patch that uses maybe_warn_cpp0x,
On 4 November 2011 19:38, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Applied. Sorry for the delay, thanks for the pings.
So we want to pedwarn directly in parser, rather than use maybe_warn_cpp0x?
Magnus did a newer revision of the patch that uses maybe_warn_cpp0x, although
I don't know what the usual policy for th
Applied. Sorry for the delay, thanks for the pings.
Jason
