------- Comment #32 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu 2008-01-07 08:00 ------- Subject: Re: [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with "complex type" conversion
"mark at codesourcery dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | ------- 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. The real mistake was when I make that constructor unary. It was a terrible mistake. And I apologize for that. The fix isn't to build more brittle tower on top of it in the name of hypothetical codes written with unfounded assumptions. [...] | One of the most frequent complaints I get about GCC is that we break | existing code with every release. I get that complain too. But only for documented features. -- Gaby -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31780
