Tested x86_64-linux. Pushed to trunk.
-- >8 --
This test fails if run with -std=gnu++14 because it should be using
is_convertible instead of is_convertible_v.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* testsuite/experimental/propagate_const/observers/107525.cc:
Use type trait instead of C++17 va
Tested x86_64-linux. Pushed to trunk.
-- >8 --
We support in C++14 as an extension, but that means that
constexpr static data members are not implicitly inline. Add an
out-of-class definition for C++14 mode.
This fixes a FAIL when -std=gnu++14 is used:
FAIL: 20_util/from_chars/1.cc (test for ex
Tested x86_64-linux. Pushed to trunk.
-- >8 --
These tests fail in strict -std=c++20 mode but their equality ops don't
need to be non-const, it looks like an accident.
This fixes two FAILs with -std=c++20:
FAIL: 20_util/tuple/swap.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL: 26_numerics/valarray/87641.cc (
Hi!
As stage1 is very close, here is a patch that implements the static
operator[] paper.
One thing that doesn't work properly is the same problem as I've filed
yesterday for static operator() - PR107624 - that side-effects of
the postfix-expression on which the call or subscript operator are
appl
Hi!
Again, because stage1 close is near, posting the following patch
to implement CWG 2654.
Ok for trunk if it passes bootstrap/regtest and is voted into C++23
and C++20 as a DR?
2022-11-11 Jakub Jelinek
* typeck.cc (cp_build_modify_expr): Implement CWG 2654
- Un-deprecation
On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 at 07:58, Michael Collison wrote:
>
> This patches transforms ((x & 0x1) == 0) ? y : z y -into
> (-(typeof(y))(x & 0x1) & z) y, where op is a '^' or a '|'. It also
> transforms (cond (and (x , 0x1) != 0), (z op y), y ) into (-(and (x ,
> 0x1)) & z ) op y.
>
> Matching this pa
101 - 106 of 106 matches
Mail list logo