On Wed, 8 Feb 2017, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Like this?
As a consequence, the following examples are invalid and G++ will no longer
-compile them:
+compile them, because, in the following examples, G++ used to treat
+this->member where member has a non-dependent type, as
+type-dependent, and now it
The document itself is still available in the link following the
one removed.
Applied.
Gerald
Index: readings.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/readings.html,v
retrieving revision 1.259
diff -u -r1.259 readings.html
--- rea
Committed (revision 245374).
Gerald
2017-02-12 Gerald Pfeifer
* doc/extend.texi (Named Address Spaces): sourceware.org now
defaults to https.
* doc/install.texi (Binaries): Ditto.
(Specific): Ditto.
Index: doc/extend.texi
==
On Tue, 7 Feb 2017, Martin Sebor wrote:
> The attached documentation-only patch clarifies the description
> of the -dM option to mention that __FILE__ (and other predefined
> macros) do no appear on the list generated by the option.
+The predefined macros @code{__FILE__}, @code{__LINE__}, @code{_
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot.
A revised PO file for textual domain 'gcc' has been submitted
by the Swedish team of translators. The file is available at:
http://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/sv.po
(This file, 'gcc-7.1-b20170101.sv.po',
On Mon, 6 Feb 2017, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
Are you planning to add this to svn.html
Ah, thanks for the reminder.
First, here's a patch to collate the existing list, ok?
Oh, definitely. This makes sense, and I trust your sorting
skills. :-)
(It seems quite a few may be dead now, time for som
Applied (revision 245375).
Gerald
2017-02-12 Gerald Pfeifer
* doc/standards.texi (Standards): Update reference to
Objective-C 2.0.
Index: doc/standards.texi
===
--- doc/standards.texi (revision 245374)
+++ doc/
It appears we have been using various ways to refer to bits of Boost
documentation, and I suggest to standardize this a bit per the patch
below.
http://www.boost.org/libs/ seems to be the shortest and
simplest form doing to.
Thoughts?
Gerald
2017-02-10 Gerald Pfeifer
* doc/xml/manua
I'd like to ping this patch for GCC 6 (and GCC 5).
Gerald
On Sun, 11 Dec 2016, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> Uros, okay to also push to the GCC 6 branch for the coming release
> and later the GCC 5 branch as well? For reference, the committed
> patch below.
>
> Gerald
>
>
> 2016-12-11 Roger Pau Mo
On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> I'd like to ping this patch for GCC 6 (and GCC 5).
>
> Gerald
>
> On Sun, 11 Dec 2016, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> Uros, okay to also push to the GCC 6 branch for the coming release
>> and later the GCC 5 branch as well? For reference, the com
On 02/11/2017 03:02 PM, Alessandro Fanfarillo wrote:
Dear all,
please find in attachment a new patch following the discussion at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2017-01/msg00054.html.
Suggestions on how to fix potential issues are more than welcome.
Regards,
Alessandro
On the failed images te
Hi,
Tested on i686/x86_64-MinGW-W64
Please test possible regressions on posix platform.
--
Regards, niXman
___
Dual-target(32 & 64-bit) MinGW-W64 compilers for 32 and 64-bit Windows:
https://sf.net/p/mingw-w64/
Index: libstdc++-v3/src/filesyste
12 matches
Mail list logo