------- Comment #31 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2008-01-07 07:48 ------- Subject: Re: [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with "complex type" conversion
gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu wrote: > But, as that hypothetical user, I would not have any ground to be unhappy. > After all, it was code based on unfounded extrapolations. I think this is a mistake. Our documentation has never been good enough for people to rely on the absence of documentation as meaningful. One of the most frequent complaints I get about GCC is that we break existing code with every release. Apparently, we do this much more often than other other compilers. You're clearly not going to agree with me. So be it. Please ask your fellow libstdc++ maintainers what they think. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31780
